Thursday, May 8, 2008


"a woman hits her fertility peak at age 22, after which point her eggs begin a slow but steady genetic decline. at age 35, the decline accelerates until she arrives at menopause, when she can no longer procreate."

don't you just love npr (national public radio) in the morning? gosh, nothing puts more pep in my step than listening to how my eggs are going to be--more or less--kaput in approximately five years! or, sorry, just "not as good as they were when you were 20". (well, shoot, a lot of things about me aren't as good as they were a decade ago . . . but then again, lots of things about me are much, much, much better . . . rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.)

i guess that i should be more worried, right? i mean, at 30, i'm just a little over four and half years away from "ovulatory(?) recession" (yeah, i coined that term).

but i'm not worried.

though, i can see how american women's trend towards waiting longer and longer before getting pregnant might be a little scary for the government . . .

can you blame us for wanting to wait? for wanting to take more control over our lives, our futures?

men have "had it all" for eons: the family, the career, the house! you name it and men have achieved it.

what about women?

a typical scenario involves the man building a successful (they hope!) career while the woman (willingly? happily? dutifully?) sacrifices a potential career in the world to stay home and build a family and home.

and yeah, i know, i'm leaving a lot of fine and important details out, but that is the overall gist.

and for many women, that scenario is ideal.

not me.

don't get me wrong, though. i want the husband, the children (albeit, i would rather adopt than have my own), and the home. but i also want the career (i love what i do!) . . . i want an equal and equitable partnership with my husband where we both get to have the great careers, buy the house together, raise the children together, do chores together . . .

will it be difficult? you bet. i'm not wearing rose-colored glasses here, after all.

m. scott peck, said in his book "the road less travelled", that love is hard, hard work. i agree. what is love but a desire and willingness to work on behalf of your beloved's physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual happiness and well-being?

would it be easier to have a family when you're still super young (as opposed to "just" young at 30+)? maybe; in some respects, perhaps. but does being younger make people better parents? not necessarily.

does waiting mean i might not be able to have my own biological children? yes, it might. but so what? there is always adoption, which for many people isn't the same . . . i get it . . . but for me, it doesn't make a bit of difference whether i give my love to my own genetic children or adopted children. kids are kids, and they all deserve love.

would it be indescribably awesome to have biological children? yes, of course! is it essential for building a wonderful family? no. would it be indescribably awesome to have adopted kids. yes, too, of course!

anyhow, glad i'm home now . . . home to my sweet, caring, adorable, loving . . . bottle of vicodin. it won't preserve my eggs, but it might preserve my sanity . . . this earache is driving me nuts!

what, oh, what shall i do when thou dost runneth out on me?

No comments: