If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Ivf
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Was watching Five news just now and there was a woman who was in her 60s and is expecting a child - this was done through IVF. (Not sure if this sounds right, tbh) Article
Am I alone in thinking that having a baby at the age of 60 is too old? We were having a debate about this in tutor this morning and my tutor (who happens to be pregnant) thinks this is wrong. She mentioned that she was watching a programme about this last night and there was a man on there who is 84 and his wife is expecting his child.
Personally, I think that giving women the option of having children through IVF at the age of 45+ is too old - women's periods stop for a reason.
Am I alone in thinking that having a baby at the age of 60 is too old? We were having a debate about this in tutor this morning and my tutor (who happens to be pregnant) thinks this is wrong. She mentioned that she was watching a programme about this last night and there was a man on there who is 84 and his wife is expecting his child.
Personally, I think that giving women the option of having children through IVF at the age of 45+ is too old - women's periods stop for a reason.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
and IVF is the human's way of telling nature to get stuffed.
Telling nature to "get stuffed" is a stupid idea. Nature always wins.
Of course I don't think it's ideal to have a child at 60 but I'm not opposed to it and I don't consider it remotely selfish, live and let live in my opinion.
Like any other treatment to treat any diseases... but you can only tell nature to get stuffed for a while... cos it wins and will always... at the end you always die...
Don't you think if the woman die at 70, leaving a 10 year old kid behind it is a bit selfish? Cos she will have a nice end of life, but the kid will end up with no parents... alive and probably for a long time, but in what kind of condition...
Also I agree with you on the live ad let live, I would never stop anyone from doing such, I just don't see the point of always fighting against nature...
Was just saying that telling nature to get stuffed doesn't last for long, I never said we should stop procreating and stop extending life of people... Was just stating a fact...
Well, what if she lives another fifteen - twenty years, as average life expectancy now predicts? At what point, then, does it become pointless to have a child because of the possibility you might die before they turn...what? 16? 21? 35? I don't think if she dies at 70 leaving her 10 year old child that she will have a nice end of life, not for one second. I'm sure she plans and hopes to be around a bit longer than that, which is why I don't feel that she is being selfish... though I'm under no illusions about the general opinion.
I believe that child will be loved wholeheartedly and therefore I can't condemn the woman for bringing it into the world, whether naturally, through IVF or alien insemination. So maybe she dies before the child is a teenager, when you bring a child into the world there is always the prospect of it someday living parentless.
I don't actually consider it fighting against nature, either, it's helping nature along through the wonderful advances that science has afforded women. The intention is good, therefore I can't knock it.
If she's paying for it herself, no worries. If she's a thief then nope.
Good point, but by end of life I meant the years with the kid, not when she is going to die knowing she will leave the kid behind...
Yep, can't disagree with that, the kid will be loved like any mother at any other age would... alien insemination sounds cooler than ivf tho
Well in a way we are nature (sort of) so our medicine is a bit too, 60 might not be as bad, but the guy that is 84 it is more than likely that he will not be around for long... Bah who cares anyway... if it makes her happy all the best wishes to her and her kid...
Surely that deserves a round of applause. :razz:
Agreed, I'm getting a bit sick of this proclivity for hijacking threads and causing them to go off on a crazy (and frankly, at this point, quite boring) tangent.
Indeed. I certainly see your point, though!
And I see yours, so tis all good
Like I said, if she's funding it, it's none of your business either way. if she's stealing to pay for it then you have a right to ask how the cash is spent. (apparently)
I do realise that you have accepted corruption, violence and theft into your life in the cowardly way that people like yourself often do and want to ignore that it's going on and focus on "wider issues" (or irrelevences that make you feel comfortable) but frankly, tough shit.
Put me on ignore if you don't like it. in this case I had a point and there I put it again.
You're the first person to think about cash - personally, I think most peoples' opinions has nothing to do with whether we have to pay for it or not.
But she may not live until then.
I don't know about anyone else but for some reason, I'd hate the idea of having parents who are in their 60/70s when I'm about 10. (And for the record when I was 10, my dad was 38 and my mum was 35)
Source?
To be honest, I'm sitting on the fence- if it makes her happy, then why not? I'm sure she's aware of the risks.
http://healthinfo.carolinas.org/healthnews/healthday/060417HD532170.htm
As far as I can see the latest work hasn't been published. But there are some papers at this page if you want to look into it further.
Well looks like I'm up shit creek then.
I'm probably biased as my mother had me when she was relatively old, and my eldest brother is near-enough twice my age, but it hasn't affected my health in any way, shape or form this far and I highly doubt it's going to impact the age at which I die. Surely once you're born and an independent being then there ends the period at which people feel they can blame the mother for any ill-fortune or problems with which the child is afflicted. I think that's a real stretch.
It is - of course - true it is going to be a strain on your average 60 year old body (and mind, for that matter) to go through a labour, breast feed, have late nights etc... as it would be for a 16/23/32/40 year old. But the woman in question is by all accounts perfectly fit and able, so why begrudge her this happiness out of unfounded worries - in honesty I find that quite sad. From what I've read and heard, I truly don't believe she is having another child at this point for purely selfish reasons -- though those who would accuse her of that would do well to remember the school of thought that claims all reproduction selfish, as it is the wish for our own genes and lineage to continue posthumously.
So theft is fine if it`s for a subjective good cause ?