Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

femfosec.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 770 posts

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#501

Post by mycologos »

centimeter wrote: post #416
cam0 wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you think it's been incredibly costly and destructive to society?

Medical outcomes rapidly become much worse and more expensive for both mother and child as mothers age, as well as precipitously falling birth rates partially attributable to the increased difficulty of having marginal children as one gets older.

I made a comment elsewhere in the thread trying to quantify the way outcomes change with the mother's age [1]. Using the data referenced in that comment, it looks like outcomes are quite stable for the entirety of a woman's 20s and still decent into her early 30s. The real change seems to occur in the early-mid 30s.

In contrast, your parent comment prioritizes women having children at age 20-25. Looking at the data I just referenced, this seems unnecessarily aggressive from a medical standpoint -- do you have a different measure of maternal outcomes in mind? (And from a non-medical standpoint, I'm skeptical that late teens/early 20s are the best time for modern humans to choose the parent of their child.)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26349221

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#502

Post by sangnoir »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #444
ljf wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question, who should?

The society as a whole seems to be as300's idea - which, in practice, means the government. If parents give up 10% of their career in order to give their kids a better childhood, are we willing to pay to make it up to them? My money is on "no way". If not that, the only other answer is the parents. Are you as parents willing to give your kids a better childhood at the price of throwing away 10% of your career, with n…

> You can't both have a wonderful career, a great marriage, and give your kids all they need from their parents. What we really need is for people to stop believing that "having it all" is possible, and therefore expecting that someone owes it to them.

I think the brutal/ultra-competitive work culture is uniquely American - Europe seems to do OK with giving working parents generous amounts of time (and money!) to be with their kids; 4 weeks PTO per year is unthinkable in the US, but I'm sure its a multiplier for good parenting.

I do not know if it is possible to change the work-culture when money is king.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#503

Post by krrrh »

jplr8922 wrote: post #417

My two cent : we got the whole ''parental leave'' thing wrong because we make business pay and the individual pay the costs. Big firm might have plenty of ressources to deal with it and 'not appear sexist', but a startup or small business will not. It should be a government program to help both the individual and his employer.

In Canada it was introduced as part of the Employment Insurance system. I think that’s a good way to look at it and spread the costs across the workforce. It doesn’t replace your full wages (I think it’s 55%, though some employers top it up with private insurance), but the parents basically get a year of wage support to divide between the two of them. Your employer also has to hire you back.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#504

Post by AnimalMuppet »

sangnoir wrote: post #502
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The society as a whole seems to be as300's idea - which, in practice, means the government. If parents give up 10% of their career in order to give their kids a better childhood, are we willing to pay to make it up to them? My money is on "no way". If not that, the only other answer is the parents. Are you as parents willing to give your kids a better childhood at the price of throwing away 10% of your career, with n…

> You can't both have a wonderful career, a great marriage, and give your kids all they need from their parents. What we really need is for people to stop believing that "having it all" is possible, and therefore expecting that someone owes it to them. I think the brutal/ultra-competitive work culture is uniquely American - Europe seems to do OK with giving working parents generous amounts of time (and money!) to be…

Four weeks vacation, and 6 months (?) parental leave. Four years is a big reach, even for Europe.

But yes, Europe does much better at this than the US. Can the US culture change enough to give what Europe gives? Maybe, but I'm doubtful.

But until it does, my point remains - in the world we actually live in, you can't have it all. You have to choose between various less-than-what-you-want options.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#506

Post by jancsika »

astan wrote: post #67

Your whole blog resonates deeply with me. All this corporate grifting and women's empowerment months will do jack shit until we figure out how to make workplaces and lives more equitable for mothers and allowing for gaps, breaks and destigmatizing time off for parents of both genders. Instead, we talk about how sexism is the biggest problem. Sure, sexism might be annoying, but in the west, it is hardly something that…

> Sure, sexism might be annoying, but in the west, it is hardly something that creates a genuine barrier for women.

HN is to technical discussions what ____ is to social discussions.

Please fill in the blank.

Serious question, and thanks to any serious respondents!

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#507

Post by hycaria »

u678u wrote: post #178

Its interesting I had a friend who got pregnant at University. I thought it would be ruinous to their career but maybe its a better solution. When she was 40 her child was already an adult and she could fully concentrate on working.

Well thing is it most often ends up in parents splitting. Although I have such a case in my entourage and it worked but I think being religious helped them quite a bit ! (For the get pregnant by accident and keep it too, now that I think of it.)

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#508

Post by jartelt »

powerslacker wrote: post #37

I'm not so sure freezing eggs is sound advice. Lord Winston, who is professor of fertility studies at Imperial College London, warned that it was "a very unsuccessful technology" and said: "The number of eggs that actually result in a pregnancy after freezing is about 1%." He later clarified he was referring to live births. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51463488#:~:text=Lord%20Wins... . “It’s not like I would disco…

Just for context, numbers I have been told from multiple fertility doctors are:

20-30% of eggs extracted will fertilize and grow to day 5 blastocysts (aka embryos). The rest will die before reaching day 5.

If the eggs were preserved before the women turned 35, each blastocyst has a roughly 70% chance of being chromosomally normal (which means it is a "good, viable embryo"). For women above 35 years old, the percentage of viable blastocysts goes down (e.g. for a 40 year old, ~40% of blastocysts are viable). This is why is it is important to preserve eggs early.

Each chromosomally normal day 5 blastocyst has about a 50% chance to result in a live birth after it is transferred.

So... if you are 35 years old and start with say 12 frozen eggs, you are maybe going to end up with 2-3 viable day 5 embryos, which are likely to turn into 1.5 children.

Note that this presumes everything is in working order with the woman's reproductive system. Egg quality issues or other issues can make the probabilities for each step decrease.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#509

Post by yibg »

ljf wrote: post #409
as300 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately I just don't think it's a tenable position to assert that women (or men) should be able to take 2-4 years off of work and not be disadvantaged in their career for doing so. I wholeheartedly support the idea that, as a society, we ought to value childcare/child-rearing and (perhaps monetarily) support those who perform this service. But I don't believe corporations ought to be the ones making a space for…

Genuine question, who should?

Depends on how you look at having children I think. If you:

1) See having children as a right and benefit to society, then society should shoulder at least some of the "burden" of it. By providing child care, (paid) maternity and paternity leave etc. Many countries already do this.

2) See having children as a privilege and a choice made by individuals knowing there will be sacrifices in time, finances, career etc. In this case, the individual (or couple) deals with the consequences. In some cases, incentives can align such that companies provide paid leave, but at least right now it's not the norm.

Looking at countries that provide paid leave vs those that don't, the ones that do seems to have a healthier society.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#510

Post by hycaria »

Baeocystin wrote: post #122
mberning wrote: post #8

I just recently had my first at an age closer to 40 than 30. I think freezing your eggs and having kids later is not such a great idea. Sure, you can have the kid well outside your prime or even use a surrogate. But that is just the beginning. Your child is not going to get the experience of being raised by a more youthful and energetic version of yourself . I think there is a lot to be said for that. I wish I had st…

My Mom was well in her 40's when I was born, my Dad in his early 50's. I wouldn't trade the childhood I had with them for the world. By the time I came around, they were able to provide a wise, warm, stable and loving home in a way that even the best-intentioned younger folks wouldn't have known how to do. That I played fewer games of toss the ball or the like in exchange doesn't matter a whit. FWIW.

I really don’t feel the same. As a young adult you get to see your parents get very old very fast, and also when you get internships first job and such your parent has been in retirement for ten years and is clueless about the workforce. Also they’re too old to bother to be grand parents now. Also my old man globally did not give a shit and focus on his own aspirations while he still had free time in good health and financially prepare for his retirement rather than see and help his kid bloom as a young adult. And I can’t really blame him for it.
Post reply on HN