Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: inflorida

Isn’t it risky to get pregnant at such an age? My wife, who is in healthcare and specializes in all things OBGYN says that after 35 years of age, it starts getting unsafe.


13 posted on 05/21/2010 6:34:06 PM PDT by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: KoRn

It’s always unsafe to an extent as there are never any guarantees but age 35 is used as the standard for AMA (Advanced Maternal Age) because at that point the risks from getting an amnio are the same as the risk of having a child with Down Syndrome. From what I’ve read, the real risks of pregnancy don’t get really bad until about age 42 and then it skyrockets.


15 posted on 05/21/2010 6:38:29 PM PDT by inflorida
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: KoRn

As I understand it, autism and Downs Syndrome possibilities increase dramatically. But, that’s OK. Hollywood ego eliminates that. Besides, doesn’t Scientology have a cure?


18 posted on 05/21/2010 6:43:50 PM PDT by jonascord (We've got the Constitution to protect us. Why should we worry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: KoRn; Irisshlass; informavoracious; larose; RJR_fan; Prospero; Conservative Vermont Vet; ...
Isn’t it risky to get pregnant at such an age? My wife, who is in healthcare and specializes in all things OBGYN says that after 35 years of age, it starts getting unsafe.
This is part of the anti-life meme that the left spreads. While the risks rise with parental age, they rise at a very low rate. They want to screen for so called "chromosonal abnormalities" and then recommend abortion when they appear. The sad fact is that these so called "chromosonal abnormalities" exist far more often than actual fetal irregularities occur is never explained, in essence the false positives drive the very profitable abortion and baby parts trade. More, the ADVANTAGES of being an older parent are rarely discussed. See http://www.babycentre.co.uk/pregnancy/ref/ageandpregnancy/ for more information.
28 posted on 05/21/2010 6:53:18 PM PDT by narses ( 'Prefer nothing to the love of Christ.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: KoRn

That’s a common misconception. My wife specializes in OB/GYN as well. It doesn’t really get unsafe, the risk factors just go up. At no point do they actually become unfavorable. Trisomy 21 is a perfect example. Worst case scenario is 1 in 25 chance of having a child with trisomy 21. Any gambler will tell you that 25:1 is as close to a sure thing as you’ll get. The risk is there, but the odds are heavily in favor of a healthy baby.

It’s all in the parsing of the numbers. Explained as I did above, it doesn’t sound bad. 25:1, not bad odds. Or you could send an expectant mother of advanced maternal age into a panic by telling her that her chances of having a trisomy 21 child are 56 times higher than they were at 21. Which is also true.


52 posted on 05/21/2010 7:23:21 PM PDT by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: KoRn

I had Sassy at 41 yrs old & I was high risk due to my own health issues. Not my age. Sassy was born perfect & now 10 yrs later is still the blessing of our lives. I pray John & Kelly have a healthy baby who will bring much happiness to their lives.


64 posted on 05/21/2010 8:12:19 PM PDT by pandoraou812 (Merda taurorum animas conturbit......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson