Should we? Really?

I see many women who are pregnant thanks to the miracle that is IVF. But because I never see the ones that don’t get as far as the 8 week booking appointment, I suspect I am prone to believing it has a better success rate than it does. And although I see many older women who are getting pregnant later than ever, I never meet those that don’t. I see women for whom egg freezing resulted in pregnancy; again, I don’t see those for whom it didn’t work.  Either way, I’m hugely in favour of technology that allows a woman to get pregnant, whether she’s in a same sex couple, single, because she chose to prolong her fertility window, or because she was struggling to conceive the conventional way. Anything that pauses that ticking clock that us women are constantly warned about, the one that men don’t have, the one that encourages women to settle early (and sometimes with real-but-uncalled-for gratitude) with a man, any man… 

For better or worse, I always wanted kids.  Even after becoming a midwife who’d witnessed the dangers, although that should have been the best contraception ever! I can’t explain it, but the heart wants what it wants, I guess. I assumed I’d get married first, after all I wasn’t crazy! A nuclear family was clearly the correct way to envisage kids. I was a well brought up French Catholic girl.

Well. That’s not exactly how it turned out. Look, I was a midwife, I knew how contraception works, and yet I found myself in the small minority for whom it failed. What can I say, I come from a very large family… Firstborn Son wasn’t exactly planned, and he was most definitely conceived out of wedlock! But he was wanted (https://midwifemotherme.com/2023/10/03/when-your-firstborn-leaves-home/). Both things can be true. So I had him. Somehow, his dad and I made it work without resorting to holy matrimony.

Not everyone feels that biological imperative though. Some women are, wisely, a bit more cautious about motherhood, would only consider it after saying I Do. They aren’t wrong; going it alone is a big deal. But as more and more women are discovering, finding a committed male partner who is ready to become a father while they are still comfortably fertile is a challenge. You can blame feminism if you like for making women a wee bit choosy about who they might consider an actual team player, as opposed to a toddler in a man’s body. The overgrown toddler is no help at all. Or you can blame feminism for allowing women to have meaningful jobs which they might be minded to keep if only their prospective partner would take on primary carer responsibilities.

Lots men do grow up and make excellent partners and take on half the burden that a child unwittingly brings. I really believe this because most of women I see in the antenatal clinic come with their partner. This is lovely and demonstrates kindness, commitment and support even though not strictly necessary. It sounds like a small gesture, but it’s a really good start. These guys will be amazing allies in their partners’ labour (and beyond) because they will be thoroughly prepared. Obviously I don’t meet those that don’t. And to be clear, I do not expect a man to show up in my clinic, as long as he does the antenatal classes and shows up prepared on the labour ward!

Men who at least appear kind and supportive are more likely to be chosen by a sensible woman considering motherhood thus they are they are the ones I see. I’m much less likely to meet those that remain incapable of even pretending to be a good guy (some are quite convincing). But the burden is on women: you should choose wisely, but good luck with that, and it’ll be your fault if you got him wrong. You may well end up waiting too long for the non-existent perfect partner, and that’ll be your fault too. Or you can just accept the man-child who will be a rubbish partner but will spare you the cost of IVF and/or egg freezing… because thems your options, unless you want to be a childless cat lady. (You may feel that this so-called threat  actually sounds lovely, in which case you are, at best, a difficult woman!)

Loyal reader. I may have said this before, but it bears repeating: it’s always the woman’s fault. The pregnancy is her fault, she should have known better. If she terminates the pregnancy, that’s child murder. If she keeps it without a ring on it, she’s sponging off the state. If she insists on the ceremony, she’s trapped him (obviously on purpose). The father? He’s the victim in all of this. And victims who magnanimously step up to the challenge, even just a little bit, are saints who will be applauded and admired.

But wait, women shouldn’t complain. All we have to do is freeze our eggs when we are young and fertile; the technology exists, we absolutely can have it all. This way we can have our (unnecessary) education, our (selfish) career, wait for the guys to grow up and morph into responsible committed partners, and start a nuclear family (better late than never). Not gonna lie, I’d quite likely have done that if life had turned out differently.

But.

Here’s the thing.

Egg freezing is quite a big deal. I touched on the subject briefly (http://midwifemotherme.com/2025/10/25/whose-womb-is-it-anyway/). It’s invasive and it’s expensive. You can, however,  eliminate costs if you ‘choose’ to donate half your eggs, but this increases your physical risks because now you’re going need to push your ovaries into extra-overdrive in order to produce enough eggs to share.

A study published in the medical journal Fertility and Sterility in September 2017 suggest the following rough numbers:
Women under 35: freezing 15 mature eggs offers a cumulative 85% chance of at least one live birth.
Women 35 to 37: freezing 20 mature eggs offers a cumulative 80% chance of at least one live birth
Women 38 to 40: freezing 30 mature eggs offers a cumulative 75% chance of at least one live birth.
Women 40 to 42: freezing 30 mature eggs offers a cumulative 50% chance of at least one live birth.

But a woman under 35 is likely to get 15 eggs in one (safe) cycle, so sharing wouldn’t really make sense. Unless you relax some of the safety guidelines and risk hyperstimulation. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is very dangerous but there’s no incentive not to push past sensible limits if the only cure is to abort the treatment and become liable for all the costs. Or you could do another couple of cycles and take on the health risks, the discomfort and the time-drain that this entails.

The problem with egg freezing is that the physical and financial cost is borne purely by women. Because as a rule, we are doing this when we are single and egotistically focusing on our career, not even looking for the elusive Mr Right. But now a woman has to choose between a deposit for a home or her future fertility. A home is pretty essential when considering motherhood. But saving for the mortgage takes time which we haven’t got, unless we freeze our eggs, which kicks the mortgage even further into the long grass… catch 22. The only certainty is that we will have chosen wrong! 

Meanwhile the guys, who are already getting paid more (because they aren’t at risk of taking time off to prolong their fertility, or at risk of taking time off to do IVF with their frozen eggs, or at risk of taking long parental leave should all this time off lead to a baby) get to save their cash. And get promoted at work because they are less hormonal than their female colleagues whose ovaries are on overdrive. (The gender pay gap is real even if my explanation is somewhat facetious).

Assuming a woman meets a nice guy whom she trusts enough to fertilise her hard won eggs (for which she paid a substantial yearly storage fee) she will now have to embark on a round of IVF. Naturally she will pay her half. But half the cost from her salary is a higher proportion of her income than his. Another hidden cost.

But then again, can women afford not to do this? Look, if you know you want the traditional nuclear family, then sure, it’s probably worth it. It gives you options and I am all in favour.

If, quite reasonably, you aren’t sure: it seems like a lot of hassle and money, semi-guaranteeing a future you’re not even sure you want. Get the dream  house. Keep the hard earned job. Cats optional! Should babies arrive, you’ll be all set.

If however, you want those babies and you have the cash you’d need for egg freezing and the ensuing IVF (because those eggs of yours aren’t going to fertilise themselves, nor will those embryos transfer themselves into your womb…) then you could consider option 3: avail yourselves of some donor sperm and just do it. The guys get paid to donate their (quality, disease-free, excellent value for money) swimmers, it’s a shame not to!  Then you can have it all: the home, the baby (without enduring the difficult IVF) and a toilet seat that stays down.

Whatever you choose, it’ll be wrong. Settle too soon and you’re wasting your education, settle too late and you’re risking your fertility, wait to find a good partner and you’re being too choosy, settle for an unsuitable one and you’re basically going it alone, freeze your eggs and you’re selfishly prioritising your career, don’t freeze them and, well, you should have, if you do have kids you are a drain on the planet, but if you don’t then why not? If you think about it, it’s actually quite liberating. If you can never be right, be gloriously, happily wrong!