Not at all. Actually, like a pervious person ssaid, teens are at one of the lowest risks (provided they are healthy). think back in history and the evolution of women. For a LONG time it was normal and expected that 13/14/15/16 year olds would have kids, and lots of them because people rarely survived past 30-35. That is how a woman's body is built...which is why teens are also the most fertile. Of course now a days society has changed and teens are not expected to get pregnant. They are expected to wait until their 20's/30's. But a woman's body is still built to be a mother in their teens. That doesn't mean I think any teenager should become a mom but it happens, and prematurity is usually not a high risk.Does teenage pregnancy cause a higher risk of prematurity?
no, but teenage crack smoking does. Actually, and in all seriousness, teenagers are more likely to have a healthy pregnancy than an older woman.. That is the way nature/evolution intended it. So i guess you could say that is all they are good for.
I think it depends on the age and how mature her body is.(and any complications) A 14 yr old's body is not ready for a baby yet, where a 17 yr old's might be. I have plenty of friends that gave birth at 16, 17 and 18 and all but one had a normal birth. One had 2 pregnancies with both kids born at 7 months.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?鈥?/a>
the answer is sadly yes but rarely i was a teenager i was 16 and i had a healthy baby don't worry long as you take prenatal and eat healthy and keep going in for your check ups and good luck to you
actually, its totally the opposite. The absolute most healthy birth and post-partum outcomes are in women ages 17-19.
wild.
statistics say yes however I had my 1st child at age 16. Everyone knew I was going to deliver wayyy early due to my age and small body size. I surprised them, I had to be induced at 41 weeks.
I dont think it does.. i had a lot of friends pregnant really young and their babies were all fine.
no
No comments:
Post a Comment