http://www.wvnstv.com/story/18014032/born-add...<quoted text>I guess you are right a woman can still have a baby in her late thirties, but most women don't wait that late. A woman can have a baby all the way up to her fifties, if she wants to. Just because a woman can still give both does not mean she is "in her prime". After all men can make babies until they are ninety but that don't mean they are in their prime. A woman who has a baby in her late thirties is not being fair to the unborn child becaue menapause is so close and not fair to the child when it is growing up. She will be in her late fifties and old enough to be a great grandma when it needs her the most in its teens. Just not fair to the child. A woman should be done having children by the time she reaches 35, just because she can have one does not mean it is healthy for her or the child to do so nearing forty. A woman is no longer in her prime after 35, and having a child does not prove she is. When a woman gets near age 40 she should accept her age with dignity and realize she is in the same age group as the ones she calls an old woman. She is no longer a youth and she is reaching an age where her children will be having children. Yes, the 40 to 60 age group is appropriate. A woman nears menapause in her 40s and after that it does not matter. Babies born to women late in life are a birth risk, why would any mature woman put a baby through that just to prove she is still young when she is defeinitely not. And guess what I am a 36 year old woman, just know the facts. My mother had a baby at 44, and admits that if she had it to over for the baby's sake and her own, she would not.
Makes one wonder who is the bigger risk huh?
Seems as though the older women no longer propose as big of a threat as the younger ones...This type of having babies has increased FOUR FOLD since 2000..(Taking for granted the majority of babies are still being landed by younger than 35 year old females of course)