Today’s post is a continuation, really, of my description of a day in Cambridge yesterday. After the morning’s lecture on the subject of Can We Really Have it All, there was a lovely buffet lunch in the hall where, many years ago, we used to dine wearing our gowns. It’s all very grand, with a beautiful ornate ceiling and light flooding in through large windows. Luxurious but relaxed, academic but now grown-up!
The afternoon lecture was delivered by Dr Jane MacDougall, a fellow of the college who had been an undergraduate there just a couple of years before I was. She is now a consultant in Obstetrics and Gynaecology and a specialist in Reproductive Medicine at Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge. A real expert then!
I was expecting someone terrifying but Jane was warm, humorous and human. Her talk on fertility preservation and egg freezing was extremely engaging. Many women attending were science graduates, and several of them were GPs, but Jane managed to give a talk that interested and informed both them and also those of us who are not in the least scientific.
What she told us was fascinating, explaining the up-do-date science around freezing of eggs, and the options that are now open to women – either those who wish to preserve their eggs for a possible later pregnancy so they can concentrate on a career or finding the right man (and have plenty of money to pay for the process and storage) or those, such as young cancer patients, who have a medical reason to consider freezing.
All extremely interesting, but Jane’s clearest and strongest message was this: women should have their babies in their 20s. She says that she tells this to women everywhere, including junior doctors, and it was a surprising contrast to the messages that we all, as well educated women, had received from family, friends, employers and society in general, amounting to advice to delay having a family until our careers were underway and we had established some financial security. Jane’s advice turns all this on its head.
What did I take away? It was all fascinating and I love learning new stuff, but my overriding sense was one of relief that none of this applies to me any more, as the 50 year-old mum of a teenager. The thought of such an array of choices, and such a variety of advice and expectations from different sources, is exhausting in itself. During the day there was much emphasis on the importance of women having choices, and perhaps a less overtly stated desire for control over our lives, but I think that both of these things can also exert a lot of pressure over women.
On a political and societal level I do think that rights and freedom are vital, and there are many more that are still to be won for women, but individually, when it comes to our own lives, wouldn’t it help to let go a little, accept that no human being can, in fact, have it all, and that we are never really in control of everything that happens in our own lives? Many women, for example, are unable to conceive however early they start to try and however much advice and medical help they seek. Jane did, in fact, point this out clearly.
When I started out on my adult life 30 years ago, I had all sorts of hopes and aspirations. Of course, I could not hope to realise them all; some just never happened, and some seemed to be wrenched from my grasp in an unfair way. As the years have passed, I have had to let go of so many things I have hoped for, simply because I am one human being and we can only fit so many things into one life. So, just for me, this is my choice: I choose to champion the rights and freedoms of women in general, while our patriarchal society continues, but in my personal life I focus on choosing the way I behave, act, feel and think, and allowing the circumstances of my existence to flow from those choices. Less control, more freedom.
It’s interesting that you stressed someone in her position would just advocate for women to have children in their 20’s. Obviously this comes from a vast scientific knowledge of fretilization, increased risks for birth defects as we age, etc. However, I have always said that I wouldn’t bring children into the world until I could pay for them, if at all.
Taking into account personal and financial responsibility, the age at which people are now moving into careers (40 is the new 20), and a myriad of other issues, I would hope that people in her position would at least address some of these other concerns. I’m hoping you left that part out. Otherwise, I would think she was pretty irresponsible.
It’s really interesting that you point this out. The lecture was part of a whole day discussing women’s choices (see my previous day’s post) and was delivered to a select group of Cambridge-educated women. One of the main issues such women have to deal with is the pressure to delay having a family while they establish their careers, and then finding in their late 30s that they are no longer able to do so. It was clearly understood by everyone there that this is the prevailing attitude and therefore her message came across as providing some balance. I agree that if such a message was given to women in a cross-section of society, some of whom might not place such importance on career and financial security, it might be irresponsible.