case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2014-10-01 08:09 pm

[ SECRET POST #2829 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2829 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.

















Notes:

Sorry, work as usual.

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 024 secrets from Secret Submission Post #404.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-02 01:14 am (UTC)(link)
Eeeh, I still think teenage years are too young to have kids, seems more prudent to have them in your 20's. Wonder if there are any statistics on what age is more likely to have premature births or things like that, because my friend who got knocked up in high school ended up having a rather underdeveloped baby.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-02 01:23 am (UTC)(link)
If you want anecdotal evidence, my fourteen-year-old neighbor got knocked up and her kid came out perfect. So did the kids of the many other teen moms she met at "pregnant school" (what she called it). They used to have playdates in our apartment buildings yard, and let me tell you those kids were pretty beautiful.
ariakas: (Default)

[personal profile] ariakas 2014-10-02 02:55 am (UTC)(link)
You're correct from a scientific (as opposed to anecdotal, as below) point of view. Girls aged 15-19 have the highest birth risks to both the health of the child and the health of the mother of any age group under 40.

(Anonymous) 2014-10-02 04:29 am (UTC)(link)
yes, but that's not neccessarily a problem of age, but of other conditions that come with pregnancies at that age. A 16 year old married (or other steady relationship) girl within a healthy family structure, who willingly got pregnant, did not consume drugs and so on will have less risk of birth defects. it's just that these conditions are not the case in most teen pregnancies nowadays (or at any time, I guess).
ariakas: (Default)

[personal profile] ariakas 2014-10-02 04:53 am (UTC)(link)
No, this was found to be the case when education, wealth, and marital status was taken into account, too. Physiologically, the female body isn't finished developing by that point, and as mentioned, is still well away from its prime fertility.