SureBaby Blog

Kelly Preston Ignored Risks

Posted by ashley

Kelly Preston and John Travolta have been celebrating the recent birth of their son Ben. In a recent interview, Kelly revealed that she hadn't actually considered the health risks of conceiving, carrying and delivering a child at the age of 48.

She is 48? Holy crap!

Seriously, she looks waaay younger than I do and I am no where near 48. Her genetics must be super powered not to mention the skills of whoever is helping her beat the clock.

I had no idea she was 48. In fact, I am surprised that there have been so few comments on her age during this pregnancy.

I think it is a bit strange to also say that she didn't consider the risks associated with pregnancy after age 40.

After all, she is not the only one who would be affected by the risks. They have a daughter, Ella Bleu, that would supposedly be affected if her mother were to encounter severe difficulties. The potential baby that would have to live with whatever genetic anomaly could have arisen should have been given some consideration.

It isn't simply a question of "if" a person should conceive a child at 47, it is more of a question of "should" a person attempt to conceive a child at 47.

Generally speaking, women attempting pregnancy after the age of 35 can expect to be warned about:

•The risk of miscarriage increases
•Fertility levels do start to drop drastically after 35
•Health problems for the woman after 35 include gestational diabetes and hypertension, as well as endometriosis and fibroids. But these can be managed with a combination of medication and lifestyle changes, such as improved diet and exercise.
•The need for c-section increases, however, many women over 35 have had normal deliveries without the need for surgical intervention.
•Increased risk of Down Syndrome. It is a medical fact that a woman aged 40 has about 9 times higher chance of having a baby with this chromosomal defect than a 30 year old woman. Don’t start to panic, in statistical terms that is still less than 1 percent, but does increase with age.

Apart from the increased risk of birth defects, miscarriage and health risks to the mom, I think the biggest issue would be the fact that her son will be three when she is 50.

Do you think all of the above risk factors are worth it to conceive a child when you are almost 50? Is it fair to the child to have senior citizens as parents who may be approaching their end of life as the child is approaching graduation from college?

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue or if I should even have a stance. What about you?

Sponsored Links for Kelly Preston Ignored Risks[what's this]

Comments (2)

  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by surebaby and Angela Ayles, surebaby. surebaby said: Kelly Preston refused to consider the risks of a pregnancy after 45. http://www.surebaby.com/blog/2011/01/21/kelly-preston-ignored-risks/ [...]

  2. penny says:

    I think it’s pretty clear how the writer of this article feels about older women having children. Yes, there are inherent risks; however, a woman’s body is still able to conceive and deliver. Long before the modern age of birth control many women had ‘change of life’ babies.

    Just because we can do all kinds of test, doesn’t mean we have to. Some families are prepared to welcome any child into their lives. And as far as resources go, this family has both the financial means and the emotional support (I assume) to take the risks involved in a child born to an older mother.

    Furthermore, let us not forgot their not so distant tragedy of losing their son. I’m sure the Preston/Travoltas will be the first to say that he will never be replaced; however, good for them for moving on and embracing new joys in their lives.

Leave a Reply