Back to mumsnet with you :fist:

So as far as i understand,This is a choice.
Imo choice is never a bad thing.Choice is empowering.PEOPLE(men and women) have to choose what they want to do with their lives.Some choose to concentrate of raising a family,Some choose to concentrate solely on a career and some choose to take on a less demanding job and have a family and a career.Choices.We can't always have everything we want in life.

The men can choose to freeze their eggs so, yeah? Oh no sorry that's not an option

:joker:

Stating the obvious but,Men and women are different.Some things will never be equal,Men won't be carrying kids anytime soon or getting 9 months maternity leave.Usually if a man chooses a time consuming career he gets very little time with his children,This is a sacrifice that has to be made in order to work in that kind of enviroment.Again choice.

Maybe then instead of offering to freeze women's eggs we should be offering more paternity for men so parents can share the load and women can become more productive humans :think:

I agree this should happen but i still don't think having extra choice is a bad thing as long as it is a fully informed choice.

It is a gamble....as I said earlier in the thread, I had perfectly viable embryos frozen and they didn't survive the thaw process....although Ruby had a much better experience. To be fair all fertility is a gamble....there is no way to know if you will fall pregnant unless you try....I guess it will boil down to how much go a gamble people are willing to take with their fertility and future family. And that is a decision that they alone (with their partner) must consider and make with no coercion.....

I don't think it is... men with high flying careers are not what I would class as 'good fathers'. You can't buy your child's love.

Men and women with not so well paying jobs may not see their children as much as they would like either though, they may have to work extra shifts, weekends, unsocial hours, bank holidays, Christmas if their jobs demand it or to make ends meet, and rely on breakfast and after school clubs to look after their children, so having a "non career type job" doesn't automatically grant you more time with your children.

Very true.

However, having a 'career type job' will almost guarantee you less time with them.

It's not so simple as that, though, it's more about "what you take home". i have a crappy middle management job with horrible hours (14 hour days, and work most weekends) BUT, when I'm not there I'm not there. The work phone is off and I can completely forget that I have a job at all as soon as I'm off the clock. It's not a distraction from family life the second I walk out that door.

Someone who is truly career driven in a more high pressure environment is NEVER off the clock. They bring work home with them, they have to be available to take calls and answer emails whether they're in the office or not that day. They might have to go to work at short notice.

Someone who is putting their all into a career path simply can't be fully engaged at home. Like I said earlier in the thread - the two just aren't compatible. Not that people can't hold down decently paid professional jobs and still be a family person... They can... But they can never be a "top of the pile" high flier. Achieving that sort of career is a 24/7 job. Being a parent is a 24/7 job. That's like... 48/14. Doesn't even make sense!