BibaKaur

Effects of Late Marriage And Postponing Pregnancy On Our Life

16 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
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, 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
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
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

    • Yes the writing on the wall for religious minorities was on the wall in 1947 by the oppression of dominant communities. If Sikhs had opted for Pakistan they would have had the same conditions perhaps worse due to Islamification of punjab agenda by the pakistani islamic politicians and mullahwad clerics. The situation isn't any better in India where they have given us genocides and attacks on our holiest shrines, scriptures and institutions. The brahminwad priestly class do not want people in Indian subcontinent to escape their power clutches. The late british prime minister Winston Churchill himself didnt want indian Independence for preciously that reason. The best course of action would have been a separate Sikh nation state of sikhistan or khalistan back in 1947. However its never too late to back independence for Khalistan, it is important for Indian Sikhs to keep supporting Khalistan covertly even if they are "proud Indian Sikhs" so that they can hold the hindutva orgs and indian government accountable for any misdeeds against Sikhs.
    • Fair enough. To be more specific the "tragedy" from the "golden age" of "glory days" of when you went to a gurdwara to what you experianced going to that specific gurdwara you went to today in 2017. The resource I will give you is this playlist. If you want because it has at least 20+ hours of material. But I would specifically want you to focus from 1801 - 1925 and 1925 - 1984 and forward. This is the series made by The Basics of Sikhi.  Personally I have never heard Nanak Naam channel. I will check it out now.
    • Even Gyaani Maskeen ji acknowledged that sikhs in punjab were merely 5% more than non-sikhs and that there was a purposeful evil agenda of reducing this 5% so that demographically the sikhs can be crushed  because in a democracy , demography is the only winning factor ! (Yes Gyaani maskeen ji acknowledged this too) Source :   Meanwhile when we ask fellow sikhs to help in increasing our numbers, they scoff at the idea and would rather say "quality is more important than quantity" . Such sikhs prefer to live in la-la land and they're only sabotaging the future of kaum. We already have suffered loss by trusting the hindu nation in 1947 .  Muslims understood this brahminical agenda well and thats why they opted for separate country for sovereignty in 1947 . You should read the earlier works of Muhammad Iqbal (founding poet of pakistan ) much before of 1947 and just a few years before 1947. Much before 1947 , he penned the famous song "Sare jahaa se achha" (still sung widely in india) and just a few years before 1947 he had said something on the lines of "Ab toh sharm aati hai iss watan ko apna watan kehte hue" Point is: Pakis knew very well that in post 1947 india, brahmans would be calling the shots and before 1947 itself , brahmans had shown their true colors  (RSS was formed in 1925)  towards muslims, christians and sikhs.  For the muslims and sikhs they wanted their assimilation back in the hindu fold . Too bad that while our muslim brothers saw this beforehand and acted , while we couldn't ! Since then the kaum has suffered, both religiously and politically.  
    • You've been brainwashed by your leftist teachers and professors, and also by watching Hollywood and Pinewood propaganda (TV & movies) uncritically. If Nanak and Gobind Singh (*) had any omniscience, they would have had homosexual weddings during their lifetimes. Why didn't they? Don't say because the culture wasn't able to accept it. Was the culture able to accept abolition of Sati? Widow remarriage? Control of manjis by women? They didn't care what the culture was, they promoted an ideal society. Why indeed did they not promote homosexuality? If you say that they were ignorant, why do you bother calling yourself a Singh?   * Note: I am not attaching "Guru" to their names because if they weren't omniscient, they're not worth following as Gurus. I, on the other hand, along with almost every Sikh from Guru Nanak Dev ji's time up to now believe they were omniscient (trai-kal darsi), and were the True Guru. I ask you: Do you accept Guru Nanak Dev ji and Guru Gobind SIngh ji as Satguru?
    • OH DEAR! Homosexual n Sikh? SIGH! A few years ago when Cameron gave the go- ahead of same sex marriage in Church, I KNEW it would have been in favour of yes. Remember end of 2012 = end of world?? I knew it meant end of certain kaljug and now kaljug has increased a few folds more. However, I also believe Sikh plus gay will not be a major issue in our times. It'll take a couple more 1000 years.