Think very carefully (I know some of you have made these points already but I'm going make 'em again)

Suppose the baby has serious health issues or is disabled? Will the baby be perceived as "damaged goods"? Will you feel somewhat responsible? Will the sister hold you somewhat responsible?

Suppose your sister makes some decisions about raising the child that you profoundly disagree with. Will you feel that you should have more of a say in these matters, since the child is biologically yours?

Suppose your sister and BIL's circumstances nosedive and they are living in relative poverty. Will you feel more compelled to bail them out than you otherwise would? Will you resent this?

It is very generous of you to consider this and if it were the ONLY way your sister could have a child, I would think it was justifiable. But the fact is that your sister could adopt a child. In fact, she could adopt a child from an impoverished country that otherwise has a bleak future..a child that is going to be born no matter what she decides.

The deadliest mental illness is bipolar disorder. Suicide rates alone are 15-19% of bipolar victims...that's completed suicides, not attempts.

BTW obesity is not considered a mental disorder. Compulsive overeating might fit into one of the categories.

Seems to me if stock photos are that limited, a happy older pregnant woman would be more appropriate than a gloomy 20-something. But the thing that annoyed me about the article was the tone. I've noticed that articles focusing on maternal age often sound as though the woman, if she was only willing to make the sacrifice, could go back in time 10-20 years and whelp that pup then and there...but she's CHOOSING to have the baby at 38 or 42 or whatever. That's particularly annoying when you consider that women wait to have children for different reasons, many of which are intended to benefit the children (waiting for a career with a secure income, waiting for a solid relationship with a prospective father, and so on).

"I ran out of my meds and I can't get any more until they finish filming me"

I agree that the husband probably has had his suspicions for some time. He deserves to be told. I think it is then up to him to decide if he wants the DNA testing (assuming that there is no other reason for it). If he has not voiced suspicion by now, he may have decided to love the baby no matter what and if he'd rather not know, that's up to him. Also, if the LW keeps mum there is a chance that the husband AND CHILD will find out later on. Suppose the husband decides to make a break then! The child would be devastated. Depending on various factors, it would be better for the child to brought up without the husband in the picture to begin with. And that would be devastating for the husband as well, not that it wouldn't be at this point.

Kudos to the LW for realizing that she is doing this and that it's a problem. If she has dear friends and a husband, chances are that it's not THAT bad. Here are a couple of more concrete tips:

Let there be silence. Compulsive talkers are often uncomfortable with silence and talk to fill it up. Try to make it a practice to count to 100 (or so) when there is a pause in the conversation. At first it might be difficult but in time she will see what most of us see: a period of silence can be meditative, not awkward.

Make it a practice to ask someone else an open-ended question every so often (5 or 10 minutes?) and then LISTEN to what that person says (rather than listening for an opportunity to return the subject to you). Try to respond with another question or statement rather than turning it back to you.

Compulsive talkers often say the same thing repeatedly. Try to catch yourself when you've already said something and are about to say it again. Saying something twice adds emphasis. Saying it four or five times is annoying.

Enlist a friend to give you a discreet signal when she or he recognizes that you're starting to go on and on. As you recognize these moments, you'll need the signal less and less.

I could go on but maybe I'll take my own advice....

I have never asked a man, including the one I married 13 years ago (yikes!) about the number of sex partners he's had in the past. I figured it was none of my business. I've never been interested in a man who finds past numbers important. It seems to me to be more about having something to use against the other in a fight more than anything else. The way the partner treats you now, not what he or she did five years ago, is the important thing. After all, a lot of faithful spouses today were wild things in the pre-AIDS 1970's.

Seems to me a "dinner hooker" would come to your house and cook for you for a predetermined amount of cash, not pretend to be your best friend on TV.

and this debate would just about be over in a few years. You don't need to agonize about drawing attention to Senator Sam Jones' homosexuality if you mention his husband Bob. Or in a few more years, his ex-husband Bob.

In the same vein as the Dove video, but focused on photograph retouching:

http://demo.fb.se/e/girlpower/retouch/retouch/index.html

No one could look quite like this girl, including the girl herself (she's 14, so we can call her a girl).

Having said that: Demi Moore is a product, and you gotta keep the product looking good so it will have "shelf shout", right?