- Fertility math? Most women flunk, survey finds – TODAY Health – TODAY.com File this under “duh!” tags: pregnancy fertility birthcontrol contraception
-
“People kind of think now at 40 what they used to think at 30,” Schoolcraft said. “People do yoga and they run and they do all these healthy things. They assume that means ‘I’m not aging.’ But their eggs don’t know that.” Part of the disconnect is because of advances in infertility treatment, which have helped boost the rates of births among women in their 40s, even as rates have dropped for younger moms. Between 2008 and 2009, births in women aged 20 to 24 reached a record low, falling 7 percent. At the same time, the rates for women aged 40 to 44 jumped 3 percent and births to women older than 50 climbed 5 percent. Those numbers are exemplified by a series of high-profile births in older celebrities, including icons such as Kelly Preston (son at 48), Holly Hunter (twins at 47) and Jane Seymour (twins at 44.) The famous mamas may or may not disclose whether they’ve used fertility aids, such as IVF or donated eggs, says Schoolcraft. That further contributes to the notion that it’s never too late to have a baby. “It sends the message, if she can do it, then Miss Healthy Boring Me, I won’t have any trouble at 41 or 42,” Schoolcraft says. The trouble is, such thinking can cheat a woman out of her options, Collura says. It’s one thing to postpone children in order to pursue education or a career, fully knowing it might be more difficult to get pregnant later. It’s another thing to be surprised by infertility.“This is not about empowering women and women’s rights,” she says. “This is about science and biology 101.” That is precisely Holly Finn’s point. She wishes she had realized earlier the effects that endometriosis and age might have on her ability to conceive. If she had her way, she’d tell women ages 26 to 34 one thing: “Start having babies now.”
-
- Letters to the editor – Nov. 13 – VOP – Ohio.com One of the best letters I have seen on the election last week in Ohio regarding public unions. tags: currentevents Ohio
-
Published: November 13, 2011 – 06:31 AM <!– End of Background Image –><!– Story goes here–> Congratulations, Ohioans! We have now made these things very clear:1. Our state and local communities will continue to struggle financially. We simply cannot afford the services we want at the prices demanded by our public “servants.” Expect reduced services, layoffs and ugly reactions from both the public and the unions. It is fantasy to believe that unions will give up any meaningful benefits in order to help improve our finances. Higher taxes are the only solution, right?2. We have learned that only labor unions can determine safe practices and staffing levels for our hospitals, fire departments, police forces and schools. Our elected and appointed managers are simply incompetent in this regard. The unions must protect us from ourselves.3. The middle class in Ohio consists only of unionized public employees. We know this because we were told that Senate Bill 5 would “destroy the middle class” in Ohio. Well, that bill would have limited the bargaining rights only of public employees. Federal employees have fewer bargaining rights than do Ohio’s public employees, Does anyone believe they are less than middle class?This election seems to have put to rest the notion that the cost of government employees has something to do with whether the government can pay its bills.Robert Umbarger
-
(Visited 10 times, 1 visits today)