• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "One for the Ladies on here!"

Collapse

  • wendigo100
    replied
    Originally posted by stackpole
    These risks rise dramatically as the mother gets older.
    Also, you start getting old while they are still at school.

    It isn't so easy at 50 to run about with them, and by the time they get to start a family of their own, you are retired (or, if your children leave it late as well, you are more likely to be dead, or ga-ga, and they will miss having grandparents).

    Unless you are an giant alien lizard of course. Although, when you are chasing your children in order to eat them (I know that's non-PC vis-a-vis giant alien lizards, but let's not beat about the bush), it gets harder to catch them at all when you reach three hundred years old.

    Leave a comment:


  • cojak
    replied
    There's definately something in the old saying "you don't know what you're missing"...

    Usually said by parents with huge black binliners under their eyes...

    I merely agree. What I don't know won't hurt me...

    Leave a comment:


  • stackpole
    replied
    Originally posted by Rebecca Loos
    Anyway what the article was basically saying was "women who wait after they're 30 to have kids are at risk of 1. finding it hard to get pregnant, 2. finding pregnancy harder 3. finding childbirth harder"

    Frankly hardly new stuff. What it doesn't say is that with science progress in helping women being more fertile, better monitoring during pregnancy and a whole lot of new birth methods, these kind of warnings are a bit old hat. Lots of women have got their first kid in their thirties and frankly that is not a problem any more.

    There! Ask an expert next time Shaun
    Bex, I wouldn't be so smug. What you have omitted to mention is:

    4. Increased risk of chromosomal abnormalities in the child
    5. Increased risk of abnormalities in the child due to harder pregnancy (eg placenta problems) or childbirth

    These risks rise dramatically as the mother gets older.

    You might be all right thanks to better healthcare getting you through "your" pregnancy, but there is a child to consider too. Such a child could carry these problems with them for the rest of their lives, and possibly pass them on to their children (if they can have them), regardless of what age they give birth.
    Last edited by stackpole; 17 September 2005, 13:30.

    Leave a comment:


  • wc2
    replied
    fe dim gobod

    Leave a comment:


  • xoggoth
    replied
    Aha! SB is back, former king of the CUK bruisers. Nobody could touch you in your heyday SB. Question is, are you still up to it OLD MAN?

    Buys popcorn and settles back in ringside seat.


    For men, there are also risks in waiting until they are older to father children as semen counts deteriorate with age, they say.
    It does indeed. Practically worthless once you have scraped it off your socks in the morning I've heard.
    Last edited by xoggoth; 16 September 2005, 17:01.

    Leave a comment:


  • wc2
    replied
    If this trend continues then the population of the UK will shrink..

    A whole generation gone.

    On the other hand there are always the young ladies from the highest hills in Wales. The average age of child birth is about 15 the'll make up the gap.

    But then on the other hand before long there will be even more Welsh.

    Looks like everyone on this board in the year 2090 will be speaking Welsh.

    Leave a comment:


  • WageSlave
    replied
    Originally posted by Rebecca Loos
    Jez, you are a dirty lot, aren't you? Suppose it's Friday.... you've got an excuse. Are your wives and girlfriends more accomodating at the weekend? I know I am
    Hey, I was very nice to DP! When everyone was being nasty to him, WS came along with a kindly word...

    Leave a comment:


  • Rebecca Loos
    replied
    Back to the thread!

    Jez, you are a dirty lot, aren't you? Suppose it's Friday.... you've got an excuse. Are your wives and girlfriends more accomodating at the weekend? I know I am

    Anyway what the article was basically saying was "women who wait after they're 30 to have kids are at risk of 1. finding it hard to get pregnant, 2. finding pregnancy harder 3. finding childbirth harder"

    Frankly hardly new stuff. What it doesn't say is that with science progress in helping women being more fertile, better monitoring during pregnancy and a whole lot of new birth methods, these kind of warnings are a bit old hat. Lots of women have got their first kid in their thirties and frankly that is not a problem any more.

    There! Ask an expert next time Shaun

    oh and here's your rolling smiley
    Last edited by Rebecca Loos; 16 September 2005, 15:33. Reason: spelling?

    Leave a comment:


  • n5gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by steve'O
    I hear you need spunk for this job

    yes I have that on the CV as well.

    (thats why the pages are stuck together.)

    Leave a comment:


  • steve'O
    replied
    I hear you need spunk for this job

    Leave a comment:


  • n5gooner
    replied
    Originally posted by steve'O
    Guy's Let's get back to the thread!

    With all these women needing to get pregnant quick! before they reach 35.
    I would like to put myself forward as a possible solution to there problem

    So many women, so little time!
    I'm highly qualified in this roll, I did this at the last contract, all by myself, I know it all, hire me, hire me.....

    Leave a comment:


  • steve'O
    replied
    Dr Cecil to you!

    Leave a comment:


  • TwoJags
    replied
    Originally posted by steve'O
    Guy's Let's get back to the thread!

    With all these women needing to get pregnant quick! before they reach 35.
    I would like to put myself forward as a possible solution to there problem

    So many women, so little time!
    You are Cecil Jacobson and I claim my £5

    Leave a comment:


  • steve'O
    replied
    Guy's Let's get back to the thread!

    With all these women needing to get pregnant quick! before they reach 35.
    I would like to put myself forward as a possible solution to there problem

    So many women, so little time!

    Leave a comment:


  • TwoJags
    replied
    Originally posted by WageSlave
    JC's a good bloke, and we all know his previous nick. For some reason the lad has decide to take to the sandals and frock, but we love him all the same.

    "The lad"?

    That ruls out fiddle, mordac, fleetwood, RogerRabbit...

    mmmmmmm

    He's too think to be Shimano105.......

    I'll get it in the end

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X