By Natalia Deriabina | Shutterstock Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, just gave birth at 37. What are the risks and benefits of giving birth when you’re older? Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, is 37 years old. Technically, that means her pregnancy was considered “geriatric,” the name for any pregnancy when a mother is 35 or older.  “Geriatric pregnancy” isn’t the most flattering phrase — doctors are starting to call lit “advanced maternal age” instead — but either way, it’s not as alarming as it sounds. Prince Harry told the press that the baby was “a little overdue,” but the baby and his mother are both doing “incredibly well.” Their son, born at 5:26 in the morning on May 6, was a healthy 7 pounds, 3 ounces, and the couple is delighted about the gift of their son.  But just how unusual is it to have a baby in your late thirties or older, though? How risky is it, really? Although having a baby later comes with a handful of slightly increased risks, as compared to younger women’s pregnancies, keep in mind that just because the risk is elevated, doesn’t mean it’s elevated to the level of being common. And there are actually plenty of reasons why it can be advantageous to have children later in life. First, the cons: Women who get pregnantRead more

Actor, producer, and award-winning humanitarian Eduardo Verástegui is again speaking out against abortion. Perhaps most widely known for his role in the pro-life film “Bella,” Verástegui also appeared in the highly acclaimed film “Little Boy.” Currently producing two new films, including the “Sound of Freedom” – focused on human trafficking – and “Mary,” about the historical killing of the innocents under King Herod, Verástegui was awarded an honorary doctorate degree by several international organizations in 2016 for his leadership and humanitarian contributions. Verástegui has never backed away from his stance against abortion, and it looks like he isn’t about to stop. He took to Facebook last week to tell his nearly 900,000 followers that “Abortion is not a right, it is a crime!” “Sadly today, the most dangerous place on the planet, where most deaths take place is the belly of the mother,” he said. “If a politician is not able to defend the smallest of his Country, the babies that are in the womb of a mother and run the risk of being aborted, then I wonder who they are defending?” Verástegui urged his followers not to let “the culture of death” manipulate, deceive, or brainwash them. He noted that accepting and permitting a mother to kill her preborn child would lead to the acceptance of all of us killing each other — a sentimentRead more

 (Live Action News) — A couple in Australia is suing an ultrasound clinic and their doctor over their daughter’s birth, claiming they would have undergone an  had they known in advance about the diagnosis of Down syndrome. The Supreme Court has given them extra time to prepare their case, in a horrifying example of yet another wrongful birth claim. In 2014, the parents visited a clinic to determine if their baby had any chromosomal abnormalities, and were told the risks were in the “low range,” so further testing was not necessary. Then, in 2015, their baby was born with Down syndrome and spent a few weeks in the NICU. The child’s parents are suing for “child-rearing and maintenance costs, as well as for loss of future earnings while caring for a child with a disability” according to 9News, with the mother also suing for personal injury. While it is not known what specific testing was used for the child, first trimester screenings are just that: screenings. They are not diagnostic, and something like a nuchal translucency screening gives an odds-based result based on an ultrasound and blood test. The only diagnostic test, an amniocentesis, is performed in the second trimester, and carries a risk of miscarriage — which is why most doctors are not willing to have a patient undergo the procedure withoutRead more

Noa with her autobiography  The death of a 17-year-old girl suffering from anorexia raises serious questions Last week the news that Noa Pothoven, a 17-year-old Dutch girl suffering from anorexia nervosa, had been euthanised flew around the world.  It wasn’t true.   The Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG) clarified what had really happened: «She decided to stop eating and drinking to bring her own death. In The Netherlands, this is not considered euthanasia or physician assisted suicide.» Chastened, the media issued corrections and moved on. Admittedly, sloppy reporting was involved. It turned out that Noa had asked for euthanasia at the Levenseinde Clinic in The Hague — a Dutch end of life clinic which specialises in “patients whose requests for assisted dying are more complex and often denied by their own physician”. Its doctors refused. “It would be fake news if we made this euthanasia,” the clinic’s director, Steven Pleiter, told the New York Times. From a public relations point of view, supporters of Dutch euthanasia retired victorious from the field of battle. The original reports in the English-language media made it appear that euthanasia is freely available in the Netherlands, even for minors, and even for psychiatric reasons — and this is not completely true. «There is a lot of misunderstanding about our legislation around euthanasia,» Dyck Bosscher, of the Dutch Voluntary Termination of Life Association (NVVE), . «The mediaRead more