This is pretty smart:

https://www.hollywoodreporter....gs-young-1235196390/

It relies on technology, the maturity and long term effects of which still have some uncertainties in my mind (technology can be perfected over time). But the basic premise is, IMO, sensible. It says, basically, that young women should get their eggs frozen while young, then focus their 20s and 30s on their vocation rather worrying about the “biological clock” to find romantic partners or have kids … because with preserved frozen eggs, these women can have kids later, after they have established financial security and emotional maturity and be truly ready to raise children materially and emotionally.

The idea hasn’t fully taken into account the increasing risk for women who get pregnant later in life, but it addresses at least the issue of preserving the eggs.

Also something to think about if you’re trans, female to male. I know a family whose trans son is considering that before hysterectomy.

Preserving options.

I think it's a really good idea for a fallback, because you never know what the future holds.

Others here have had their children when they were older than I was (23), and waiting is a good idea for plenty of reasons, but I've often thought that I would have had trouble with the physical part of childrearing if I'd waited longer. I had pain issues by my mid-thirties that would have made it a challenge. My sister is almost as old as I am, but she waited until she was past 35 to begin having children and I remember watching her chase them and thinking, "There but for the grace of God..."

Also, and this is again an individual thing, my doctors were never able to figure out why Muffin's Sister was born so prematurely. If I'd waited, my body might have aged out of being able to carry a child, even if I'd frozen eggs. This would have put me in the position of looking for a surrogate.

All that is to say is that life is a crapshoot. Freezing eggs is one way to hedge one's bets, but there are no guarantees.

My daughter asked me about this. I told her she has to consider the cost and risk of egg retrieval. The cost of egg storage. The risk that the storage facility will go bust or damage or lose the eggs. And the cost of fertilizing and implantation.

I think for most people, it might be better to do things naturally and either adopt or buy some eggs later.

This also implies that for some people, the desire to have biologically-related children is very strong. This isn't the case for everyone, obviously. There's nothing keeping someone from delaying childbirth and then deciding to go with a surrogate or adoption. I recognize that these options involve logistics and expense, but so does egg harvesting, retrieval and storage.

IIRC, egg harvesting is potentially risky as well--since you are artificially inducing your body to produce multiple eggs, using hormone cocktails.

Finally, as someone who had kids relatively late (35 and 39), I can tell you that there are costs and benefits to waiting. The most obvious benefit is that with age comes (hopefully) a bit of wisdom, perspective, and a better bank account balance. But it does a *number* on any woman's body, and the older you are, the less able you are to bounce back. You are seen as the "old" parent at school functions, etc., and it can be hard to find a comfortable social niche at those. Odds are the family members for your kids (aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins) are also on the older side.

Finally, there are breast cancer risks (perhaps others as well) associated with not having children in your 20s. This group also includes women who are childless.

So it's a complicated equation. That said, I think it's clearly a good option for many women, but I'm a big fan of a full, informed consent.