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).

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.

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.

OK, CT, that was a little too stream-of-consciousness for me. I am certain that you are not wandering around the buses looking for easy targets.

Getting real for a minute...how dangerous an area are we talking about? Are these ladies going out in downtown St. Louis? Two women whom I am certain have cell phones taking a bus at 9 pm and coming home in a cab...that doesn't sound so dangerous to me. If the clothing were such that a quick getaway or defense were prevented (say, if the women were wearing very high stiletto heels), then they might be a bad idea, but not because they are sexy. (Maybe some of you ladies can balance on one stiletto-ed foot while impaling the attacker with the other, but I'm pretty sure I'd end up assaulted AND with a sprained ankle).

I'm in agreement with the LW's concerns. First the BF doesn't want her to ride the bus in party clothes, then he won't want her going out without him at all, then he won't want her socializing with her friends... before anyone realizes it, the friend is cut off from the rest of the world and from reality checks. A definite alarm is the friend treating the BF's concern over the clothing as the last word on the subject, suggesting that he has made clear his veto power over her actions in the past.

If the guy was simply protective he would have offered to drive them or encouraged her to take a cab each way.

Dems have the House, the Senate and the majority of governerships. I've waited a long time to feel this smug. And I like it. But I'm not sure how long it will last.

that should be separated: Is the concern that she will get ogled and whistles (annoying) or actually be assaulted (dangerous)?

Wearing club clothes on a bus might well produce comments, stares...but are they dangerous? The LW was specifically concerned about danger. These kinds of attentions are more annoying and distracting than dangerous (although I can imagine one actively avoiding them). If this is the BF's concern, I think he's definitely controlling.

Or is the concern that she could be sexually assaulted? Many have voiced concern that she may be seen as "asking for it" and thus puts herself at risk. But is that really a risk factor for stranger rape? From what I've read and been told, a rapist doesn't look for the hot sexy woman. He looks for a woman whose appearance and body language suggests that she's not going to fight back or otherwise thwart his plan, or a woman who is careless about safety (leaves a door unlocked, walks in unlit remote areas alone). A full-length coat might not help her in this case, unless she can fake others into thinking she might have a gun under it.

It's not clear to me what the BF fears, but either way his concern could be resolved in an non-controlling manner by simply springing for cab fare each way.

"Yeah, I told my husband that his shirt and tie didn't match the other day when we were going out to the company party because I'm a controlling bitch!"

Uh, no. A controlling bitch tells him to change RIGHT NOW into the clothes she picked out for him or they aren't going to the party. You on the other hand are doing your husband a favor.

I bet a lot of adults, including those who would object to the wine, as children played with their little friends while the mothers chain-smoked in the same room.