The tick tock of the biological clock

Filed under: Work Life, Medical Conditions, In The News, Mommy Wars

A piece in this weekend's Boston Globe makes a bold statement: Women in their twenties who want to have children should focus on finding a mate. Author Penelope Trunk notes that many young women are putting their careers first and delaying plans for a family. The reality of the biological clock may argue for a reversal of priorities. Spend your younger years breeding, and you can always spend your later years working. Simply put, "Your ovaries will not last longer than your career."

My inner feminist is pretty offended, but my inner pragmatist thinks there is something to consider here. There's no question that fertility decreases with age. It's harder to get pregnant and it's harder to stay pregnant for women in their mid- or late thirties, compared to their twenty-something counterparts. And while no one advocates rushing into parenthood, waiting too long can make having biological children (if that's your preference) difficult or impossible.

I'm not saying women shouldn't have careers. I'm not saying those careers can't be important. I am agreeing with the article's point that women have a limit to their fertile years, while men -- for all practical purposes -- do not. If having a family is a priority, you have to treat it like one.

Did you have your family earlier or later in life? If you waited, did you feel any sense of the biological clock ticking?

ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)


Flickr RSS



AdviceMama Says:
Start by teaching him that it is safe to do so.