I Hate Dialysis Message Board
Dialysis Discussion => Dialysis: General Discussion => Topic started by: paddbear0000 on March 07, 2008, 10:36:15 AM
-
I desperately need some advise! As you know, I am not yet on dialysis, but have started the process of doing a preemptive transplant. My husband and I have recently been talking about having a child. I know, I have stated in the past that we would never have a child due to passing on my type 1 diabetes. But things have happened to change our minds. Anyway, we have come up with a few options. I refuse to be pregnant while on dialysis, nor do I want to push my kidneys over the edge and end up on dialysis because I was pregnant. Our plans are to either freeze some eggs and ask another family member to carry the baby (as it would also be too risky for me with the advanced state of my diabetes) or just go ahead with the kidney/pancreas transplant as soon as possible and wait the 1 year time period before getting pregnant myself.
What should we do? Which would be the safer alternative? Does anyone know anything about freezing eggs and IVF? Who do you talk to about freezing eggs or IVF? We're so lost and confused! The costs alone scare me! Help! Any advice/information would be greatly appreciated. All we want is a child, but this has become so complicated (and expensive)! How do people afford to do this?
-
I think in this case age matters. If you are close to the magical 40 I would do the frozen egg thingy. If you are young enough to wait til after a transplant the rewards are probably greater to carry your own baby.
-
I'm onl 30, but I don't want to be a 50 year old parent with a young child either.
-
We have a couple at chucrh who could not have childrenand they started taking care of foster children.
They have now adopted a little preemie who came home from the hospital to them. He is a sweetie.
Another couple is doing the same and they hope to adopt a baby girl in their care.
-
Great reply Sluff. Couldn't of said it better. :2thumbsup;
-
Maybe freeze your eggs just in case.
However, your health is primary and if you choose to have children you need to stay healthy enough to be there for them. With that in mind, it may turn out adoption or fostering children is a viable alternative. While having your own children is a wonderful experience, I know many people who have chosen to adopt when unable to have children and the benefits have been equally as wonderful. Wishing you the best outcome.
-
**Warning, LONG!**
I got pregnant and carried my son about 16 years after my first transplant. I spoke at length with both my OB and nephrologist before ever going off the pill, to be sure both were comfortable and felt it was a reasonable risk. Both had essentially the same reaction: "You've had this kidney for this long and you're stable. Yes, there's risk involved, but we'll monitor you closely".
I saw the OB about once a month for the first five or six months, then twice a month, and eventually worked to once a week. I was also having two ultrasounds a week (once for my regular OB, once for the high risk team he had me seeing). The pregnancy was mostly uneventful until about 30 weeks in, when I started having swollen ankles and elevated BP (I worked on my feet a lot, so thought the swollen ankles were from that). The week that started, the OB ordered me to bed rest, and that seemed to stave it off for a bit. I ended up in the hospital about three times in the last month of my pregnancy due to my BP getting too high. In fact, I was in one hospital over a weekend and my high-risk team was at another hospital, and I had an appointment with them on that Monday morning. I was discharged from the hospital in order to go see them.
Because my blood pressure had been so high (160/110) for so long (off and on for several weeks, and constantly for about four days), they decided that I needed to go ahead and give birth. Unfortunately, because I was so early (35 weeks), inducing did not work. They tried for 36 hours, until my son began going into distress and they ended up doing an emergency C-section.
My son had some minor problems at birth, but after spending about 36 hours in the NICU, he was released to go home and is today, at 9 years old, extremely healthy with absolutely no lasting effects.
Unfortunately, this MAY have been the beginning of the end for that transplant. My creatnine had been stable for the entire life of the transplant at 1.4, and the day after he was born, it was up around 1.9, and only went up over the next few years. I got another transplant (from my father) when my son was around 3 1/2. I knew this was a chance going into the pregnancy, and of course, would not change my decision, even knowing then what I do now.
Keep in mind, that aside from my transplant and high BP, which was controlled with medication, I had no other medical problems going into the pregnancy, so this may have accounted for the somewhat easy time I had.
It all comes down to how much are you willing to risk in order to have a baby? If anyone had said to me (which they did when I asked about a second child), "It could kill you", then there's no way I would have done it. But that's a decision each woman needs to make, no matter how good her health is.
Best of luck to you, no matter what you decide. I know it's not an easy decision, and it's a very emotional one. However, the rewards are endless!
-
Hey KT - did they change your immunosuppressants when you decided to get pregnant?
-
okarol, no, they didn't. At the time, I was on prednisone and imuran (azathioprine), and both were determined to be as safe as anything else available at the time (1997/1998). They did change my BP meds, though I'm sorry, I can't remember what I had been on or what they switched me to. They changed those in December, and I found out I was pregnant in March.
-
There is no question that freezing the eggs and relying on in vitro fertilization is the only way to go. If you attempt a pregnancy while having to take extremely toxic immunosuppresive drugs to preserve a kidney-pancreas graft, there are many developmental difficulties the fetus could develop, especially in the formation of the nervous system. Also, even with a kidney-pancreas transplant, you will still not be healthy, but both your renal disease and your diabetes will persist, though in much more moderate form. Still, since you will just be on the edge of being able to keep your own body healthy and functioning, you won't have the reserve capacity to build a new human with any certainty that there will not be imperfections which will affect the child. For example, it has recently been discovered that children whose parents are older when the children are conceived have a lower life expectancy and a greater chance of disease, just because of such a subtle influence as the egg and sperm being from older people. Think of how much stronger the negative influence would be from growing in a body which suffers from diminished renal and subnormal pancreatic function, and is also flooded with toxic immunosuppressants!
Unfortunately, adopting a child is difficult, since most adoption agencies require that the new parents be healthy, on the theory that children who have already had to deal with the trauma of shifting from one family to another should not also have to deal with the trauma of losing a parent.
You might want to think again about the morality of risking passing on the genes for type 1 diabetes, since it is now well established that the risk for the development of diabetic kidney failure is also more genetically determined than it is influenced by blood sugar control. So the child would not only face the risk of diabetes, but the risk of the worst of the diabetic complications. That is a terrible burden to impose on a child from the instant it comes into the world.
-
Immunosuppression regimen is changed when a post-transplant woman decides to get pregnant. They usually advise you to wait at least 3 to 4 months before attempting to conceive so that you can be monitored for a possible rejection episode as a result of changing the immunosuppression regimen. Pregnancy in a transplant recipient is, by definition, a "high-risk situation.
Here's a link to read more info: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/481217_print
-
Risk and reward. No regret.
-
I have done IVF 3 times. The first time, I got pregnant and have a 3 year old son as a result. The second cycle did not work. I just had my third embryo transfer (when they put the embryos in your uterus) and am pregnant again. Now, I don't have kidney disease (I'm on this board because of my mom who does), my husband and I have severe fertility issues but can get pregnant with IVF, obviously. If you have any questions about IVF, I am more than willing to discuss it with you. We are very open about IVF and I will answer any question you have. I will warn you (you probably won't mind it as much as I did) it involves a LOT of shots--both sub cutaneous (those are usually in the belly) and intramuscular (in the hips above your butt--I'm doing those right now and I only have 3 more left!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). Many clinics will freeze your eggs. There is also a procedure called PGD which you might be able to do on your embryos to delete the gene that carries your Type I Diabetes....we didn't use it because our issues aren't genetic but you might be able to. You will need to find a Reproductive Endocrinologist to work with and possibly a genetic counselor...there are a LOT of things they can do! Don't give up!!!!!! Like I said, I'm an IVF vet and have been there, done that...just let me know if I can help! Good luck!!!!
Beth
-
Risk and reward. No regret.
:clap; I have two beautiful children and NO regrets.
I wish you luck Paddbear and partner in your decision. Just remember .... no regrets. :cuddle;
-
There is also a procedure called PGD which you might be able to do on your embryos to delete the gene that carries your Type I Diabetes....we didn't use it because our issues aren't genetic but you might be able to. You will need to find a Reproductive Endocrinologist to work with and possibly a genetic counselor...there are a LOT of things they can do! Don't give up!!!!!! Like I said, I'm an IVF vet and have been there, done that...just let me
Good luck whatever you decide! Things sure have come a long way in the last 20 years, imagine,.. removing DNA of diseases that could hurt the baby, thats the best thing I have heard in a long time... :2thumbsup;
-
I heard for Alport Syndrome they now know the genetic marker so they can probably take that out too. There is still a 50/50 chance in most cases to get the gene as there are two partners going into it naturally. Play with God or play God?
-
I heard for Alport Syndrome they now know the genetic marker so they can probably take that out too. There is still a 50/50 chance in most cases to get the gene as there are two partners going into it naturally. Play with God or play God?
Our daughters Neph is trying to learn how to turn "off" the Alports gene
-
Paddbear, I love your baby Zoe! She (?) looks very sweet. As much as I love dogs though, nothing compares to a child. And really, even though my pregnancies and the actual birth too (one at home was awesome... another story) I know the real gift is the child. No matter if you bring the child into the world or someone else and with or without your genes, you will love that baby like no other. I had my second child at age 30, you are not too old. Life is about living.
-
Many posts here seem to take the view that it is all a matter of how the mother will feel about her choice, but the only moral issue is how responsibly the mother is acting in taking this risk for the unborn baby.
Unfortunately, there is no way to remove the genes either for type 1 diabetes or for the subtype of type 1 diabetes which is prone to renal failure, since at this point, the entire cluster of genes involved in both cases has only been partially and very hypothetically identified.
If the child is never born, then given the rarity of severe, genetically-conditioned illness in the general population, the odds are that its place will be taken up in the world by the perfectly healthy baby of someone else, bringing much more happiness into the world than the first alternative would have.
-
Also, you are VERY young to be doing IVF.....I had my son when I was 33 and I am now 37 and will be 37 when my next child is born in November....so, age is just a number! Good luck!
Beth
-
I had my kids at 30, 33, 35 and 40. I didn't have any other health issues, so I was lucky. Planning well, being informed, getting good care, all these things will help you.
If I couldn't of gotten pregnant I would have adopted. Things work out for the best.
-
Stauffenbrg--Most of the time, I value what you have to say. This time, however, you have really upset me with what you last posted. I don't know if it's because of my over-emotional state right now, or what, but am I reading this right? Are you actually telling me I shouldn't have a child just because there is a small chance (12% according to the latest research) that my child might become a type 1 diabetic?! I find this extremely insensitive and cruel. Am I supposed to be denied the one thing I want in life, something that we all have a right to, a child, just because of a minor chance of disease. And one that countless numbers of people live long and happy lives with? I know we've had this discussion before! And for your information, my kidney failure has been determined to have been caused by a hospital's incompetence, and NOT from my diabetes! :rant; :banghead;
-
Just wanted to tell you that you are not alone in feeling extremely hurt by Stauffenberg's postings recently. This is a very personal subject and you are seeking out advice from a public forum, so be aware you may hear things you really don't want to hear. Guard your heart. Take his letures with a grain of salt, and let your heart lead you in what you want to do. We are here for you... :grouphug;
-
Don't let his comments get to you please. :cuddle;
-
I dont think his comments were meant to hurt your feelings....maybe the reality he lives with is different then yours. 12% does not sound like an unreasonablly high risk, but I have heard of people with a 50% (of other dieases) risk saying it isn't too high....I guess it boils down to what risk can you live with? and what risk is okay (to you)to impose on another human being?
I do hope you find a way to have a child that is good for you and good for the baby.
-
When we were told our only option to have biological children together was IVF, we didn't look back. We didn't care what people had to say about the moral or medical aspect of it. My husband and I wanted children period. We did what we had to do and are happy with that.....if we always did what other people said we should or listened to the first opinion, we wouldn't have our beautiful son and #2 on the way. The way I see it is this, we didn't choose infertility, it chose us and we chose to deal with it OUR way. You do what works for YOU and your HUSBAND. You have a great deal of support here, don't worry about the one bad apple.... :grouphug;
Beth
-
Sorry for everyone's distress, but I would suggest that the distress is something which is in fact created by nature, and I am just pointing out the moral dilemma that follows from nature's cruelties, not creating them myself. Everyone has a moral duty to do the best for their future children, such as not drinking alcohol and remembering to take folic acid during pregnancy. This duty is especially strong because future children are helpless and totally at the mercy of the decisions we make for them, and we cannot consult them to know what risks they would be willing to tolerate, so we must always be extremely conservative in the risks we accept for them.
When Michael Jackson held his infant over a balcony of his hotel room high off the ground, he was condemned worldwide for his action, yet this act exposed the baby to less risk of serious health problems than a 12% risk of type 1 diabetes would.
When I was in my twenties and thirties there was considerable pressure on me from other people to become a father, but I refused because I did not feel morally entitled to accept the elevated risk of passing on type 1 diabetes on behalf of an unborn child whose agreement to accept this risk I could not obtain. People tried to tell me the risk was small, or that diabetes would be cured before my child would develop type 1 diabetes. But that was more than 20 years ago, and no cure has materialized. While I regret not having had any children, I would make the same decision again today as I made then, because I don't feel it is my moral right to expose a child I am supposed to be protecting to even a small risk of a horrible disease.
Everyone has a legal right to have a child, but law and morality do not always overlap. It is up to you to decide whether you feel you have acted properly as protector of your future child by your decision to proceed.
-
You know, whatever we know about the illnesses that we have or that are in our family tree - there are even more that we don't know about! I don't know everyone in my family. My mom doesn't even remember all of the illnesses that her family has. Not have a baby because of that - especially with our current and continued growth of knowledge on how to treat these ailments that may or may not happen? I don't think so. A child has just as much right to be here as the parent has to make the decision to have him or her. I couldn't imagine life without my sons. I know they would tell me that they were glad I had them.
You can be in the most perfect health and then have complications during birth that affect your child's health. Shall we not take that chance and all be barren?! There is cancer, diabetes, kidney disease, heart disease, and more I'm sure in my family medical history. There is also the 'moral' awareness that some people lean on and they say "I would never bring a child into THIS world. Too much suffering going on."
When I had my youngest, the doctor decided to let the attending nurse take him out. Well, she dropped him back in and he ended up swallowing merconium (sp?) and was in intensive care for 5 days on intravenous antibiotics! No long term after affects thank God. You just never know and to put your life on hold for such a menial thought is ludicrous.
Paddbear, you've made some good decisions and you and your hubby just have to decide which one will work for you both. You are in my prayers that this child comes to fruition. :cuddle;
-
Obviously, we are only morally responsible for the risks that we a) know about in advance of our decisions and that we b) have good reason to regard as risks greater than the normal background level of negative chances in life.
Everyone here seems to want to speak only for the interest of the parents in having children, not for the interests of the child, which our society normally takes as primary. It is arrogant to make the assumption for an unborn child that it will want to live a life with some terrible disease, when we can't know this in advance or seek the child's agreement to the perilous experiment that life will somehow turn out to be worth living despite the disease.
If suicide were simple, and people could just vanish painlessly in an instant if they found their lives intolerable, taking the risk of disease for one's future children might be tolerable. But the blind, irrational instinct to live no matter how awful life is always opposes the rational decision to escape it, so when we bring someone into the world with a high risk of disease, we bring them into a trap from which they cannot easily escape.
-
First, Paddbear, I hope everything falls into place and you get your wish.
Second, as someone said, it is an open forum, so we need to beable to express ourselves without fear. A marvelous member of IHD once told me that she thinks of everyone as a family member----Goofynina was the funny sister that keep us laughing, someone else is the go-to guy with all the answers, another is the grandmother who just wants everyone to play nice and another is the known cynic. We are all so different, in different stages (both physical and emotional). So try not to take any one post personally. The topic of having children when you could possibly pass on a disease has been discussed a few times and it will always be a heated subject, because it is so personal. No one has the perfect answer for you and your husband. With the help of you doctors, you will beable to make a very educated desicion and I wish you all the best during this journey. And don't think of adoption as a last resort; there may be a precious child out there just waiting to call you Mommy! Good luck :grouphug;
-
In the end, I think it would be best to follow the advise of your medical team.
They know the intricacies of your health issues along with how your health issues could effect your own health and an unborn child's health.
If having a child proves too risky for either you or an unborn child, then there are wonderful children out there waiting for a loving adoptive
family. I know of many loving families blessed with adopted children.
The need for having your own child, at any cost, is unreasonable. But after weighing all the issues, as discussed here, and most importantly as discussed by your medical team,
leads you to pregnancy ---- then I wish you and you baby good health.
-
My parents passed on alcoholism and polycystic kidney disease (and that's all we really know about so far.)
Had they known, perhaps they wouldn't have had any children.
But I am happy to be alive, and so are my 3 siblings.
-
My parents passed on alcoholism and polycystic kidney disease (and that's all we really know about so far.)
Had they known, perhaps they wouldn't have had any children.
But I am happy to be alive, and so are my 3 siblings.
I too have PKD and am HAPPY to be here. Life throws us all kinds of curve balls. If it wasn't PKD it would be something else.
You never know what is lurking around the corner... breast cancer gene, prostate cancer, bowel cancer to name a few that have genetic links. A close friend died of leukemia at 31. We will never know what is ahead of us.
Stauffenburg,
You always revert to suicide. Is the bitterness you hold actually anger towards your parents for having wanted a child?
"when we bring someone into the world with a high risk of disease, we bring them into a trap from which they cannot easily escape."
It is clear from all your postings that you are not a parent.
-
I'm not a parent, but I'm the only one here defending the rights of children not to be exposed to risks they did not agree to accept. Ironic, isn't it?
My family tree was riddled with cases of type 1 diabetes, many of which involved unspeakably hideous outcomes. According to the phenomenon geneticists describe as 'genetic anticipation,' the disease was striking earlier and more viciously in each succeeding generation. I put a stop to this burgeoning cruely of nature, however, and now I am both proud and happy to think of all the people my action has spared the miseries of this fate. The way family size grows over the generations, there could have been hundreds of people in a few generations from now who would have been suffering from diabetes if I had not stopped the juggernaut no one else in the family had the good sense to oppose.
When I survey my life, I would say that the most important and morally significant thing I ever did was not to have children.
-
It sounds like you made the right choice for yourself, Stauffenburg.
Did you know that no baby gets to agree or disagree with whether they are exposed to any kind of risk or not? It is the role of the parent. It is their right to make the choice for themselves and their offspring.
Some parents are great, some suck. Some people should never have children, but they do. Do we think that every life will be risk free, pain free, struggle free? Of course that's what a good parent strives for.
-
When I survey my life, I would say that the most important and morally significant thing I ever did was not to have children.
:beer1;
-
We have learned so much from people that are not perfect. I am watching a show on savants. It's the actual person whom the movie Rainman was based upon. Description of savant:
Savant syndrome describes a person having a severe developmental or mental handicap with extraordinary mental abilities not found in most people. This means a lower than average general intelligence (IQ) but very high narrow intelligence in one or more fields. Savant syndrome skills involve striking feats of memory and arithmetic calculation and sometimes include unusual abilities in art or music.
There is a woman who sings opera, plays any instrument by ear - not just plays but is excellent.
I don't want to detract from paddbear's situation, just that we all have a right to be here. There is no guarantee in life that you won't be affected by something knowingly or not. There's always a chance that despite the odds you will have a healthy child even though your past is riddled with illness. I don't think anyone is going to change anyone's mind, just when someone is making an informed decision about something so important - we should support them and give them hope. We don't always have to show the other side of the coin when the payment on the one side is enough.
-
This is such a big decision for you and I totally understand how hard and stressing it is. I would talk to your OB/GYN about this and perhaps see if you could talk to a high-risk OB/Gyn and see what they say. I know it is harder for a Type 1 Diabetic to carry, but there are so many things a Dr. can do to help, that I think it's worth a shot.
I have infertility issues (Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome) and Rob has some due to his diabetes, so we got help with Fertility drugs. After a few attempts and nothing happening we decided to go for adoption. We are lucky to be adopting through DSS/Foster Care, our son means the world to us. Our social worker knows all about Rob's Type 1 Diabetes and Kidney failure, but knows that he keeps himself in check with dialysis and visits his Dr's regularly. They want at least 1 person who doesn't have medical issues. We thought a lot about having a child and what seeing Rob on dialysis would do to them. However, my son is fine around it (he just turned 9) and is sympathetic and supportive. Just letting you know this is another option out there for you.
In the end, only you and your husband can make this decision. Bringing children into your life will definitely make your world happier. You are great with your dogs, I know you will be a wonderful mother!
-
paddbear --
I have purposely stayed away from replying to this thread because having (or not having, in my case) children is a very sensitive subject and brings tears to me. But, I think I want to say something now.
Marvin and I could not have children. He got sick six months after we were married with a serious blood disorder (he has a disease called ITP -- he has low platelets because something unknown in his body destroys the platelets as soon as they are made). When that happened, we agreed to some experimental drugs for Marvin, in order to save his life. We were told then that the drugs could possibly make it impossible for us to have children in the future. At that time, the risk was worth it -- we were saving Marvin's life and very possibly giving up the chance to ever create "new" life in the exchange. It was worth it then, and, given the same option, we'd do the same again.
For almost nine years (as Marvin returned to "normal"), we still wanted -- and tried -- to have children. We tried fertility drugs in the hopes that they would be successful. No luck! The IVF was just too expensive an option for us. We considered adoption, but we tried to hold out a little longer to see if we could have children on our own.
Nine years into our marriage, Marvin was diagnosed with ESRD and started dialysis (no warning -- and, the doctors have said, no relation to the blood disease he has). We were told then that adoption was out of the question because of Marvin's health issues. We resigned ourselves to the fact that we would never have children. We've been married now for 22 years, and the ONLY sad thing that has ever occurred in our marriage was when we knew we'd never be parents.
Marvin and I love children. We have both volunteered for 22 years in the youth recreational activities in our community. We coach youth (under age 12) baseball teams (except this year, we're taking a break), and Marvin has coached basketball and football youth teams for years, too. I'm a teacher -- and love my job and working with young people every day! We have been told by everybody we know that we'd be good parents, and I think we would have been. We have patience, a lot of love to give, and a desire to have children.
At first, I thought the fact that we couldn't have children was a curse from God. Then, I realized that I couldn't have handled all that Marvin's been through and taken good care of children, too. I think I would have been overwhelmed. Perhaps God was looking out for me after all! But, the desire to have children has never gone away (I'm 45 now, and Marvin is 52), and, in fact, it has become harder to accept after all these years (rather than easier). Other people our age are beginning to experience grandchildren -- oh my, how wonderful that must be! My head tells me this was best for us (no children), but my heart just won't accept that.
As someone who has never had children and can never have children (and not by my and Marvin's choice), I would say to you, "Don't pay any attention to the statistics and the could-be scenarios. Go with what's in your heart." I know for a fact that Marvin and I would have been thrilled with any child -- even one with diabetes, kidney disease, heart disease, physical handicaps, mental handicaps, etc. We would have, through our example, taught our children to live -- and live happily -- with any disability or any disease that they might have had. We would have loved them unconditionally and passed on coping techniques that would have made them strong, successful, honorable people, and we would have never regretted bringing them into this world even if the world and they themselves were not "perfect."
You have to decide for yourself what's best for you and your future children. Search your soul and see what the answer is -- if it's to go ahead and have children, go after it with everything you've got!
-
Thak you petey. After reading what you had to say, you made me feel better about the choices we face. Obviously we are a long way off from a final decision, but you, and in fact, most of you have made our situation a lot easier to deal with. :grouphug;
-
My mom had diabetes type one with a weak heart from another illness she contracted as a teen, and a life filled with poor health. She had four miscarriages and gave birth to one still-born daughter. When it became clear to her that she would never have children, she adopted. I was the first. Maybe things were different fifty years ago and the rules in Canada are different than in the States, but she did indeed become what she wanted the most.
Illness to me was just a part of life. I learned about diabetes, needles, hospitals, diet, and all that goes with it but never did I think that adopting me, my sister, my brother, or the twenty years of fostering she did was something she shouldn't have done.
She passed away at the age of seventy and the way I look at it, I'm grateful for all she taught me. In fact, I thank her for bringing me into a home where illness was apart of life because now, with my partner on dialysis, I can't help but feel that I became her child for a reason.
If I were the one with illness, I don't know what I'd do but I do know that we all go through some form of suffering in this life and through this suffering, we can find the most beautiful gifts given.
My mom was one of them and whenever I think of her, a line from a song she sang always runs through my head....what will be, will be.
-
Paddbear go with your heart. I read what petey wrote and it brought tears to my eyes. Hubby and I have been married 23 years and no children. We waited a while first when we got married thought we had lots of time but things didn't work like we had planned. I did get pregnant in 1990 but miscarriaged at 3 months. Keep trying but no luck after. We both love kids and would have made good parents. I teach grade 2 and they are my babies. Like petey most people our age are in to the grandparent stage and we are not even parents. So paddbear go with your heart if you really want a child go to your docs and get advice. If we had to worry about all the things that could be passed on to children or what could happen to them nobody would ever have any children. Live for today!!! face problems when and if you have too. :grouphug;
-
padda, I was once in a similar situation to you. I wanted a child more than anything else in the world, and as you know from my previous post in this thread, I got pregnant and now have a wonderful 9 year old son. I never had to think of it from the perspective that petey and del have, but they both make a very good point...this is not a decision that is going to get easier to live with if you don't go with your heart. Absolutely be smart about it, and talk to your doctors, and really PLAN, but don't decide not to have children just because of a "what if".