BibaKaur

Effects of Late Marriage And Postponing Pregnancy On Our Life

20 posts in this topic

Biba Kaur this is simplistic thinking , the fact that we do not eat according to gurmat bibek and eat outside ready made foods and drinks means we are ingesting large quantities of literal poisons which strip our bodies of their natural vitality and health it is not just age and delayed pregnancy . Vaccines have been found to have preservatives with known infertility effects also such as polysorbate 80. Less drugs of all forms need to be taken and only necessary medical intervention at a last resort where diet modification has failed to resolve . I mean our great grands had massive families on very simple to no medical intervention... must be something there 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On August 24, 2016 at 8:37 AM, jkvlondon said:

Biba Kaur this is simplistic thinking , the fact that we do not eat according to gurmat bibek and eat outside ready made foods and drinks means we are ingesting large quantities of literal poisons which strip our bodies of their natural vitality and health it is not just age and delayed pregnancy . Vaccines have been found to have preservatives with known infertility effects also such as polysorbate 80. Less drugs of all forms need to be taken and only necessary medical intervention at a last resort where diet modification has failed to resolve . I mean our great grands had massive families on very simple to no medical intervention... must be something there 

I totally agree with you on the diet perspective but I think age matters too. In out great grandparents' times it was very common to get married at an early age, so that could be one factor too! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, BibaKaur said:

I totally agree with you on the diet perspective but I think age matters too. In out great grandparents' times it was very common to get married at an early age, so that could be one factor too! 

my Nani ji had her first at 21 nd her last baby 24 years later making her over 45 , another Masi of mine had no children and then had her first in her late forties and of course that 70 year old singhni had a baby boy this year ...

we can do it later in life, but the main thing is, you need to be less selfish and that is the main problem, people are too self-centred these days to give their time and attention to each other and their children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 70 year old Singhni used a donor egg. You see it's not the ability to carry a child that we lose with age, it's our eggs. If a couple are ok using a donor egg (the baby will be the husbands and another woman's DNA but the woman giving birth will have no biological link with the child) then pregnancy and having children can happen into the senior years. I'm not sure how I'd feel about carrying a child though that was not biologically mine and even worse was genetically my husbands and another woman's. 🤔

Edited by HarkiranKaur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

The 70 year old Singhni used a donor egg. You see it's not the ability to carry a child that we lose with age, it's our eggs. If a couple are ok using a donor egg (the baby will be the husbands and another woman's DNA but the woman giving birth will have no biological link with the child) then pregnancy and having children can happen into the senior years. I'm not sure how I'd feel about carrying a child though that was not biologically mine and even worse was genetically my husbands and another woman's. 🤔

You know what? The baby would feel the same, thinking what a monster's womb i was for 9 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

The 70 year old Singhni used a donor egg. You see it's not the ability to carry a child that we lose with age, it's our eggs. If a couple are ok using a donor egg (the baby will be the husbands and another woman's DNA but the woman giving birth will have no biological link with the child) then pregnancy and having children can happen into the senior years. I'm not sure how I'd feel about carrying a child though that was not biologically mine and even worse was genetically my husbands and another woman's. 🤔

That's your own opinion and your entitled to it. But there are many women that would be ok with it if they cannot have children. Even couple's adopt children that are not born to them, but they treat and love them as their own, even though are not biologically theirs. 

Edited by simran345

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, simran345 said:

That's your own opinion and your entitled to it. But there are many women that would be ok with it if they cannot have children. Even couple's adopt children that are not born to them, but they treat and love them as their own, even though are not biologically theirs. 

Adoption is different as you both are adopting the child together. In egg donation the baby is literally a combination of your husband's DNA and another woman's. You would have no link with the child genetically but your husband would. It would be closer to being a step mother from a previous relationship than adoption and much more complicated on if you tell or not to the child. Imagine family saying oh hey the baby has your husbands eyes and your nose. But you know the nose can't possibly be yours. With adoption the family knows and it's open. With egg donation it's a lonely journey for the Mother who has to deal with the comments on the baby's looks etc and knowing that none of herself will ever be in there. Still some people are fine with it but most Never ever tell the secret even to the child. But if they do find it eventually, how would you feel if your own child now thinks dad is still dad biologically but thinks of you as just an adoption mum. So it's more complicated than you think. Adoption is actually much easier to deal with. I have had a family members life torn apart because of the big 'secret'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Adoption is different as you both are adopting the child together. In egg donation the baby is literally a combination of your husband's DNA and another woman's. You would have no link with the child genetically but your husband would. It would be closer to being a step mother from a previous relationship than adoption and much more complicated on if you tell or not to the child. Imagine family saying oh hey the baby has your husbands eyes and your nose. But you know the nose can't possibly be yours. With adoption the family knows and it's open. With egg donation it's a lonely journey for the Mother who has to deal with the comments on the baby's looks etc and knowing that none of herself will ever be in there. Still some people are fine with it but most Never ever tell the secret even to the child. But if they do find it eventually, how would you feel if your own child now thinks dad is still dad biologically but thinks of you as just an adoption mum. So it's more complicated than you think. Adoption is actually much easier to deal with. I have had a family members life torn apart because of the big 'secret'. 

So what. Not everybody thinks like you. Hor lecture likla. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, HarkiranKaur said:

 how would you feel if your own child now thinks dad is still dad biologically but thinks of you as just an adoption mum.

 

Children do not think like that. They show love and commitment to whoever raised them. In some cases the bond between a woman and her non-biological child is even stronger. Why do we always hear stories of women who have (along with fathers) who have killed thier children, or let abusive partners kill their childre.

 

You act like yours is the only opinion worth listening to. Isn't your time on this forum over?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, simran345 said:

So what. Not everybody thinks like you. Hor lecture likla. 

Well if you dont then you will hear nothing else. The same rubbish, over and over again. This forum is better off without her.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, chatanga said:

M

Children do not think like that. They show love and commitment to whoever raised them. In some cases the bond between a woman and her non-biological child is even stronger. Why do we always hear stories of women who have (along with fathers) who have killed thier children, or let abusive partners kill their childre.

 

You act like yours is the only opinion worth listening to. Isn't your time on this forum over?

I was speaking from family experience in how egg donation CAN affect a family. I didn't say it will affect every family the same way. But some people might not have thought of what can happen despite wanting the picture perfect family. Egg donation may work great for some, but others it turned out to be disaster. I'm not telling people don't do it, just if they do, seriously think about what it entails and if the child will ever be told or not and if it, it's a difficult secret to keep. And please don't tear me apart on this one Chatanga I have had close family tragedy related to this. And even though my husband prefers that I stay away from you guys and stick with like minded sangat, it's a public forum. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Adoption is different as you both are adopting the child together. In egg donation the baby is literally a combination of your husband's DNA and another woman's. You would have no link with the child genetically but your husband would. It would be closer to being a step mother from a previous relationship than adoption and much more complicated on if you tell or not to the child. Imagine family saying oh hey the baby has your husbands eyes and your nose. But you know the nose can't possibly be yours. With adoption the family knows and it's open. With egg donation it's a lonely journey for the Mother who has to deal with the comments on the baby's looks etc and knowing that none of herself will ever be in there. Still some people are fine with it but most Never ever tell the secret even to the child. But if they do find it eventually, how would you feel if your own child now thinks dad is still dad biologically but thinks of you as just an adoption mum. So it's more complicated than you think. Adoption is actually much easier to deal with. I have had a family members life torn apart because of the big 'secret'. 

I know a couple who had a child after trying for 14 years.

My guess they used someone else's sperm for IVF that means baby's biological father was a donor.

It really doesn't matter coz these procedures are kept secret in punjabi-Sikh society.

99.9% chance is child will never be told or know about it.

You being white don't know about the stigma attached to barren wife in Indian society especially low caste, uneducated, rural.

They are not open to straight forward adoption but will Cheat to save face in society.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chatanga said:

Well if you dont then you will hear nothing else. The same rubbish, over and over again. This forum is better off without her.

Lol tell me about it. Tape bandh nai hundi. 😏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, singhbj singh said:

I know a couple who had a child after trying for 14 years.

My guess they used someone else's sperm for IVF that means baby's biological father was a donor.

It really doesn't matter coz these procedures are kept secret in punjabi-Sikh society.

99.9% chance is child will never be told or know about it.

You being white don't know about the stigma attached to barren wife in Indian society especially low caste, uneducated, rural.

They are not open to straight forward adoption but will Cheat to save face in society.

 

I can understand that. Adoption is more open in west. In case of my family member the secret came out and result was not good I mean really not good she tried to commit suicide when she found out she had been lied to and never considered her mother to be her real mother. She also started to search for her real mother (she considered the donor her real mother) it was a big mess and still isn't right. 

I can understand the desire to save face in society but it still must be a huge burden on the mother to know it's not her biological child though she will love the child just the same but I mean the knowledge and the secret must be hard especially since they can't ever tell anyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, HarkiranKaur said:

I can understand that. Adoption is more open in west. In case of my family member the secret came out and result was not good I mean really not good she tried to commit suicide when she found out she had been lied to and never considered her mother to be her real mother. She also started to search for her real mother (she considered the donor her real mother) it was a big mess and still isn't right. 

I can understand the desire to save face in society but it still must be a huge burden on the mother to know it's not her biological child though she will love the child just the same but I mean the knowledge and the secret must be hard especially since they can't ever tell anyone. 

I'm sorry for your relatives both daughter & parents.

But you see in India, female's are known for their "lie-ability" other wise there's trouble in paradise.

Living with in-laws, husband, kids plus juggling relatives, neighbors, friends isn't easy.

Nobody will tell you that they had an IVF & miracles are extremely rare nowadays.

Edited by singhbj singh
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, singhbj singh said:

I'm sorry for your relatives both daughter & parents.

But you see in India, female's are known for their "lie-ability" other wise there's trouble in paradise.

Living with in-laws, husband, kids plus juggling relatives, neighbors, friends isn't easy.

Nobody will tell you that they had an IVF & miracles are extremely rare nowadays.

Plus it's nobody's business how somebody has their child. It's the extended families and relatives that want something to gossip about in India and to cause problems in somebody's life, that's why they don't tell anybody. And why should they, it's got nothing to do with nobody else. But society there want to do their own thing and not move on from breaking families. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, simran345 said:

Plus it's nobody's business how somebody has their child. It's the extended families and relatives that want something to gossip about in India and to cause problems in somebody's life, that's why they don't tell anybody. And why should they, it's got nothing to do with nobody else. But society there want to do their own thing and not move on from breaking families. 

 

It is a catch 22 situation, whether to tell or not.

Couple can choose whichever they like.

Bheinji, humans are social animals we can't live in isolation.

We can very well opt for good rather than bad society.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, singhbj singh said:

It is a catch 22 situation, whether to tell or not.

Couple can choose whichever they like.

Bheinji, humans are social animals we can't live in isolation.

We can very well opt for good rather than bad society.

 

Hanji paji, that's what I agree with. It's up to the couple to tell others if they want to. I'm not saying nobody should not if they want to. I'm saying nobody should be forced to go shouting it over the roof tops. At the end of the day, it's the couple's children, and nobody's business what treatment they had, but not be ashamed of it either. There is no need to tell every jeeto, shindo, or ge jo because it's non of their business. Confiding in close relative or somebody they trust should be enough. 

And yes, to keep away from the ones that like to ferh the karchis. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the real benefit of early marriage especially in the Diaspora in modern age when all the expenses are crazy? Each situation should be compared differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Whether you’re a confident but controlling first-born or a resourceful yet restless middle child, your positioning in the family can affect everything from your choice of career to how successful your marriage is.   The order we’re born in – first, middle or youngest child – is outside our control. So it can make us uncomfortable to think that our birth order can play a significant part in our success, our personality – the direction of our life. Surely, these things are not set before we even get started? And yet, we all know a ‘typical middle child’, we recognise ‘classic only-child behaviour’. And the over-achievement of the first-born is one of the most consistent findings in child psychology. So how big a role does birth order play? I’m coming from a vulnerable, emotionally charged and pregnant perspective. I have two daughters, aged five and six, and am about to add a third baby to the mix. At the moment, Ruby, our eldest, has life sussed. She’s independent, educationally gifted and sometimes I think I could leave her in Sainsbury’s and she’d probably look after herself. Tara, her younger sister, is the one who wants the cuddles, who frets if I’m not first at the door when school finishes. The idea that she’ll soon be shoved out of her space as the baby of the family and squashed into the middle fills me with guilt. Is it downhill for her from now on? The importance of birth order was first set out by the Austrian psychologist Alfred Adler. Michael Grose, an Adlerian-trained parenting expert and author of Why First-borns Rule The World And Last-borns Want To Change It (Random House, £12.99), explains the basics. ‘We’re in a Darwinian struggle from the moment we’re born, fighting for scarce resources within a family – our parents’ time, love and affection,’ he says. Through human evolution, birth order has determined who inherits power (the first-born) and who is sent to war (the youngest as he was the ‘spare’). First born Historically, first-borns have been less likely to die in infancy, are less susceptible to disease and, as adults, are more likely to reproduce. They are their parents’ ‘blue-chip security’, whose birth is most eagerly anticipated, whose first steps, first words, first everythings are celebrated. ‘Typical first-borns are appro-val-seeking missiles,’ says Grose. ‘They’ve been showered with attention and identify strongly with power.’ First-borns are thought to be conscientious and achievement-oriented. A study of Norwegians born between 1912 and 1975 found that educational achievement was highest in first-borns and diminished the further down the birth order you got, despite little difference in IQ. The legal profession is, says Grose, filled with first-borns. World leaders are also overwhelmingly first-born children. On the negative side, first-borns are the only ones who experience having their parents all to themselves, then having to share them. For this reason, they’re thought to be anxious, emotionally intense, defensive and prone to jealous rages. These are all characteristics that fit Sarah Ruskell, 43. The eldest of three, she’s a successful academic, married with three children. As a child, she was serious, bookish and mature. ‘I had a younger sister and brother who were much naughtier on a daily basis,’ she says. ‘But if I was pushed, if they messed up my room or touched my records, I’d rage. Any threat to my power, I suppose.’ Another characteristic of first-borns, according to Frank Sulloway, author of Born to Rebel (Abacus), is caution and aversion to risk. They’re the least likely to travel or be physically daring. Again, this fits Sarah. While her middle brother took up hang-gliding and both siblings backpacked round the world, Sarah’s biggest adventure to date is a thunderstorm in France. Many theorists group only children among first-borns ­– although they never experience having to share their parents, nor the frictions, fights or fondness that comes with siblings. For this reason, they feel like outsiders, distanced from much of life. The only child is thought to be extremely mature, aloof, someone who expects a special standing. Middle child So what about the middle child? According to Darwinian theory, they lose out as they are neither the precious, able, oldest,­ nor the vulnerable youngest. Their strength is that they learn to be more flexible and sociable, to compromise and build coalitions. ‘Middle children tend to be more relaxed,’ says Grose. James, 39, is a typical case. Born between his sister and brother, he has always been easy-going, and loves to be surrounded by friends. Yet his affability comes at a price. ‘I turned my back on becoming a pro rugby player because I lacked competitive drive,’ he says. As the first-born boy, James didn’t struggle to establish his own identity as some middle-borns do, but, he says, ‘if I wanted something I definitely had to shout the loudest to make myself heard’. Gemma, 33, the middle of three sisters, found it harder to carve out her niche. ‘I lived in my older sister’s shadow, and was overlooked in favour of my younger sister,’ she says. ‘I felt left out, and overcompensated by forging friendships outside the family.’ She also became a skilled negotiator. ‘As a “middle” I was the peacemaker. I still use those skills now, and I’m good at seeing everyone’s point of view.’ Last born The youngest children are more likely to question the order of things, and develop a ‘revolutionary personality’. Many last-borns choose a completely different path to their older siblings to avoid direct competition. They are the babies of the family, and may grow up expecting others to take responsibility. ‘They’re not life’s volunteers,’ says Grose. ‘They’re more likely to put others in service.’ As the youngest of three, I can recognise myself in that. Growing up, I was the most likely to have blazing rows with my dad, I sympathised with the underdog and I’m not a volunteer. (At family get-togethers, I’m still the least helpful.) But a lonely outsider, struggling with an inferiority complex? It seems harsh to condemn anyone to this description simply on the basis of where they stand in the family. Grose admits the effects of birth order can vary according to different factors, including temperament, gender and age gap. Lucy McDonald is the third of five children, but was the first girl. ‘I’ve got a mix of middle and oldest child traits,’ she says. ‘You can have an easy-going first-born, which will ease the competition all the way down,’ says Grose. ‘If the children are the same sex, the competition is more extreme –­ two boys close together produces the most rivalry, and, generally, the closer the age gap, the more dramatic the birth-order effect. When the gap is more than five years, it’s greatly diminished.’ Grose has found birth order a useful tool when dealing with adult clients. ‘Recently, I was approached by a professional in her forties who was basically worn out,’ he says. ‘She admitted that, as a child, she was always playing catch-up with her sister, who was two years older than her. She had always tried to run as fast and be as clever, and the pattern had played out her whole life. As an adult, she was competitive in everything ­– she’d replaced her older sister with her colleagues, her boss, her friends. Despite career success, she was never happy with herself. Helping her see the problem through the context of birth order put her on the path to understanding and modifying her behaviour patterns.’ Cliff Isaacson, author of Birth Order Effect for Couples (Fair Winds, £9.99), believes birth order can even help you find a partner. ‘Two third-borns make the best couples,’ he says. ‘They relate without conflict, there’s a lot of humour and they make a protective environment for their children. Two first-borns rarely connect, there’s no compromise, it’s not a happy relationship.’ According to Isaacson, however, birth order is not a fixed state. ‘It’s a set of strategies developed in childhood to cope with your siblings (or lack of them), parents and the family situation,’ he says. ‘As you get older, you may learn other ways of interacting with your peers. The best reason for studying your birth order is to understand yourself or your children a little better – then overcome it.’ Are you a born leader? More than half the US Presidents, every US astronaut and most Nobel prize-winners have been either first born or an only child. Typical professions are law, politics, science and accountancy. First-borns: Bill and Hillary Clinton, George W Bush, Saddam Hussein, Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler (actually his mother’s first surviving child), Kylie Minogue, Cherie Blair. Only children: Winston Churchill, Joseph Stalin, Franklin D Roosevelt, Jean Paul Sartre, Burt Bacharach, Frank Sinatra, Tiger Woods. Middle children: many middle children work in retail, sales, fashion, advertising or the caring professions. Stella McCartney, Michelle Pfeiffer, Jacqueline du Pré, Princess Diana, Cindy Crawford, Cate Blanchett, Emily Brontë. Last children: thought to be rebels, non-conformists, also drawn to creative professions and performing arts. Joan of Arc, Mahatma Gandhi, Charles Darwin, Leon Trotsky, Charlie Chaplin, Hugh Grant, Johnny Depp. Source - https://www.psychologies.co.uk/birth-order-effect
    • https://www.thequint.com/women/2017/03/15/sexual-harassment-at-the-time-of-sita-draupadi-mandodari-ahalya-ramayana-mahabharata
    • Yeah, but as a condition for marriage if everything else was excellent; that's an overperfection. Though he's got to be happy, instead of starting a marriage on a bad foot.
    • Massands were proven to be Anti-Gurmat, for this very reason? Only Guru Sahib can give Amrit; this is proven in Gurbani 24/7 when imperfect humans start putting their feet in water, and calling it Amrit then we have problems. Guru Sahib is allowed to give Amrit because he is God's form. Nihangs also don't believe in female Punj Pyare; the only groups that do believe in it are man-made Jathas and not Jathas made by Vaheguru; Taksali and Nihangs; (note, not all Nihangs were formed by Guru Sahib). +1, nobody should be changing the topic, but O.P. really got to stop msking threads like this; he has not even bothered to post anything in this topic he knew would lead into a fight. (I'd give him 9000 troll points for this).
    • I'd say most Sikh guys are between 5'6" and 5'11" taller than that is not the norm from what I have seen. And for women about 5'2"-5'5" average. You can find Sikh girls in the 5'8" or taller range but rare. Of course I'm not in Punjab but Kashmir.