Wednesday, 23 December 2009

anger

The worst thing -

No. Not the worst thing. Everything about this is the worst thing.

One of the many worst things about this is the loss of time. The feeling that we've lost a year in the race* to have children. A year that, in my early thirties, I just don't have.

By the time it happens again, by the time I actually have a baby in my arms (pleasepleaseplease), I'll be pushing 35, if not actually 35. And no, that's not much different to the 34 years and one month I would have been if this baby had been destined to be born. But it does make a difference. '35' is that magic number when suddenly you're considered to be old, in childbearing terms.

It's just so frustrating.

I miss this baby so much. It seems crazy, to miss something that was only ever a potential baby. Something that was destined never to be.

But I'm angry with it too. For wasting my time.


*I know it's not a race. But this was the word that came out, and although I considered changing it, it felt like the right word.

3 comments:

Mosher said...

I'm 36. I've been broody since I was 16 (yes, I'm male - I checked again in the shower this morning) and I'd "aimed" to have a family by the time I was 30.

In that time I've met precisely one woman who I felt completely and utterly right about settling down and raising children with. Two others who I would have been overjoyed had it happened with as well.

Woman 1 is slightly older than me by a year or two. She recently gave birth to her 2nd daughter in rapid succession with the guy she left me for. Both babies are gorgeous (as it their mum!), healthy and destined for a wonderful life.

Don't put a date on it. Don't set targets. It'll happen when it does. That's what I'm telling myself, at least!

B said...

thank you mosh. i do appreciate your comment, and i realise that the odds are still good that my next pregnancy will end well. but they're noticeably worse than they were a year ago. and i'm already in a minority (somewhere less than 0.6% of women will miscarry at the stage i did) so stats are not at all reassuring. neither are personal stories.

a chromosomal abnormality, which is likely to be what happened with this baby, is probably just random chance. but even random chance means that this could happen again. and just because it's happened once doesn't mean it won't happen to us again.

also, you're male. your fertility doesn't decrease as much as mine will. you could still father children into your 70s, although the odds wouldn't be good and i wouldn't recommend it!!! :) just one of those things. it's different.

i've spent ages trying to decide what to say, because i don't want to sound ungrateful for your comment. i hope i don't sound so.

Mosher said...

Not at all - different viewpoints of the same issue :)

My main issue is I don't want to father kids in my 70's despite so many women I know telling me I can. Where's the fun in having a 9-year old when you're 80 and can't play football with them without dislocating your hip? ;)