Home Politics & Debate

Hewitt: critics of 62-year old mum "hypocritical"

BillieTheBotBillieTheBot 🤖Posts: 8,667 Automated Account
On Saturday morning, Britain woke up to the news that Patricia Farrant, 62, had given birth to a baby boy earlier in the week after having IVF treatment in another country. Oddly enough, she gave the interview to the Daily Mail, which only months earlier had condemned a woman of 66 for giving birth. Most of the press have been critical on the news. Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt has stepped in. Speaking to Sunday AM, she said "We have seen a quite extraordinary transformation in fertility. We are the first generation where you can have two women of the same age, one of whom is becoming a grandmother where the other one is pregnant. These are real changes in reproductive technology, in women's fertility, taking place. But let's remember, men have always been able to father children into their 60s, their 70s, even occasionally their 80s so some of the furore about a woman having a child when she is 62 - I think there is a certain amount of gender hypocrisy there." Click here for the story.

We already know Patricia has a very poor grip on reality, hence her saying the NHS was having its "best year ever" amidst deficits, sackings and ward closures. But this reaches new heights. Just what is she talking about? Gender hypocrisy? Since when have men been able to give birth? Send a nurse over to the Department of Health to inject Hewitt with a dose of reality at once, doctor. Isn't becoming a mother at 62 selfish in the extreme? I would argue it's a hideous decision, utterly repellent. Think of that child born last week. By the time he's a teenager, she could be dead. Imagine if he goes into his first job, passes his exams, goes into university - his parents might not be there to witness it. Isn't that a heartbreaking thing to contemplate? Having recently spoken to some people who lost their parents when they were young, I can say it affects a child profusely. Would you wish that on anyone? Hewitt would, by the sounds of it.

Over to you. Is this Farrant woman being fair to herself and her child by having a baby at her age? And is Patricia Hewitt lost to the realms of La La Land? Over to you...
Beep boop. I'm a bot.

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think its wrong. As you said by the time the child is in there mid teens the parents will be pushing 80. How are they supposed to raise a child when they are at an age where they may not even be able to take care of themselves? Plus the child is going to have to live the vast majority of their life without their parents even around. I don't think its right at all. Why was she even given the treatment in the first place? Women have a body clock for a reason, because after a certain age they shouldnt be becoming parents.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Renzo wrote:
    I don't think its right at all. Why was she even given the treatment in the first place? Women have a body clock for a reason, because after a certain age they shouldnt be becoming parents.

    Agreed. And her mum is old enough to be her grandmother, which is a rather scary thought!
    Think of that child born last week. By the time he's a teenager, she could be dead.

    Which could actually happen to any child; but I do see what you're saying.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    Having recently spoken to some people who lost their parents when they were young, I can say it affects a child profusely. Would you wish that on anyone? Hewitt would, by the sounds of it.

    Oh give over! That is one hell of a leap in logic.

    I think it's incredibly hypocritical, especially when males in our culture - such as that wrinkled leather satchel Des O' Connor - are slapped on the back and almost revered as some fertile icon of the way men can continue to have kids long after women are considered to be past their child-bearing years (suppose it's alright if you can pull a younger, fertile lassie despite looking like the end of a Gregg's sausage roll/cat's arsehole as Des has somehow managed). Fathering a child at 72 makes him signifigantly more likely to die before his child is at university or getting hitched than this 62 year old new mother... obviously that doesn't warrant the same horrified and indignant screeches as this case does. What-fucking-ever.

    As for the "body clock", I do believe that where possible it's best to listen to your body and what it is telling you. But why shouldn't women who have the desire to become a mother later in life be benefitting from scientific advances that allow them at least the chance? I think it's sad enough that she had to go abroad, but then of course women are consigned to the scrapheap as dried up and useless once their looks fade and they're not hatching eggs like a battery farm chicken.

    I absolutely despise the "they'll die before.." and "they won't be able to wipe their own arses in five years" comments. Great achievements involve great risks, eh. People can die at any time, many 62 year old women will continue to live independent lives in full control of their faculties for many, many years. Some might die two years on. Same goes for a mother and father of any age; if we all cut our hopes, ideas and plans off at the past because of what-ifs and fears of dying before they came to full fruition then we'd be a pretty sad bunch. Though maybe we already are. I congratulate the new parents, babies are always a blessing... even if they come into the world via a harrangued and supposedly past-it mother ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't agree with it...and shes a child psychiatrist, you'd think she'd be aware of the impact.
    The menopause happens for a reason, it means you're no longer suitable to have children. I don't agree with older dads either because i think it's just as unfair on the child.
    Are they really going to be able to look after a child in their teens when they're pushing 80? Hows the child going to feel when everyone assumes or asks if their parents are their grandparents?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    briggi wrote:
    Oh give over! That is one hell of a leap in logic.

    I think it's incredibly hypocritical, especially when males in our culture - such as that wrinkled leather satchel Des O' Connor - are slapped on the back and almost revered as some fertile icon of the way men can continue to have kids long after women are considered to be past their child-bearing years (suppose it's alright if you can pull a younger, fertile lassie despite looking like the end of a Gregg's sausage roll/cat's arsehole as Des has somehow managed). Fathering a child at 72 makes him signifigantly more likely to die before his child is at university or getting hitched than this 62 year old new mother... obviously that doesn't warrant the same horrified and indignant screeches as this case does. What-fucking-ever.

    As for the "body clock", I do believe that where possible it's best to listen to your body and what it is telling you. But why shouldn't women who have the desire to become a mother later in life be benefitting from scientific advances that allow them at least the chance? I think it's sad enough that she had to go abroad, but then of course women are consigned to the scrapheap as dried up and useless once their looks fade and they're not hatching eggs like a battery farm chicken.

    I absolutely despise the "they'll die before.." and "they won't be able to wipe their own arses in five years[/i]" comments. Great achievements involve great risks, eh. People can die at any time, many 62 year old women will continue to live independent lives in full control of their faculties for many, many years. Some might die two years on. Same goes for a mother and father of any age; if we all cut our hopes, ideas and plans off at the past because of what-ifs and fears of dying before they came to full fruition then we'd be a pretty sad bunch. Though maybe we already are. I congratulate the new parents, babies are always a blessing... even if they come into the world via a harrangued and supposedly past-it mother ;)

    hail.gif

    yeah that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    hail.gif

    yeah that.

    Joins in. All hail Briggi. hail.gif
    Ballerina wrote:
    I don't agree with it...and shes a child psychiatrist, you'd think she'd be aware of the impact.
    Exactly, but to a contrary conclusion, being aware of the consequences, and making a considered decision to do something within your expertise, can heighten the experience of motherhood.
    Ballerina wrote:
    The menopause happens for a reason, it means you're no longer suitable to have children.
    This is true, as is a young woman's fertility and yet hormonal contraception is considered the norm, to the extent that it is expected of a woman that she artificially restrict her childbearing. Why is one way great and the other an abomination?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So what is the 'right' age to have children, then? If a mother has a child at say, 20, she's considered too young and if she has one at 62, she's considered 'too old'...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Bah who cares... Same thread again... Same replies again... Bla bla bla...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Feel free not to post if you don't care, but those people who do want to discuss an issue, have a right to do it without being criticised.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    In my piece i was refering to the bloke too. Again i think its unfair on all involved, especially the child if men or women becoming parents at an age where they should be collecting their pension.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm assuming that se's got a child with IVF or something - which seems to me to different issue from an older man still being able to produce sperm naturally and having a child.

    Personally I think having pensioner parents is wrong, but short of forcing men over a cerain age to have the snip there's nbothing we can do about it. We can stop giving IVF treatment to women of a certain age.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    NQA wrote:
    I'm assuming that se's got a child with IVF or something

    And you assume correctly.
    Personally I think having pensioner parents is wrong, but short of forcing men over a cerain age to have the snip there's nbothing we can do about it. We can stop giving IVF treatment to women of a certain age.

    Don't they stop giving IVF to women over a certain age (UK, anyway) already?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sofie wrote:
    And you assume correctly.



    Don't they stop giving IVF to women over a certain age (UK, anyway) already?
    yeah, but she went to another country.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ballerina wrote:
    yeah, but she went to another country.

    Yeah, I know that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sofie wrote:
    Yeah, I know that.
    i can't remember what the age limit is here. 55/56 mark i think....i can't remember
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sofie wrote:
    And you assume correctly.



    Don't they stop giving IVF to women over a certain age (UK, anyway) already?
    I don't know to be honest. If she goes abroad to have it there's little we can do about it in practical terms - short of not letting her back in the country which seems a tad extreme
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jim V wrote:
    Feel free not to post if you don't care, but those people who do want to discuss an issue, have a right to do it without being criticised.

    :lol: Was just saying that I didn't care and that it has been done already... The Bla bla bla was just refering to what I posted when last thread about that subject appear... Was just to lazy to type it again... Not criticism to others at all... Sorry if it didn't came out right...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    briggi wrote:
    Oh give over! That is one hell of a leap in logic.
    I really can't see how that's anything but logical.
    briggi wrote:
    I think it's incredibly hypocritical, especially when males in our culture - such as that wrinkled leather satchel Des O'Connor - are slapped on the back and almost revered as some fertile icon of the way men can continue to have kids long after women are considered to be past their child-bearing years. Fathering a child at 72 makes him signifigantly more likely to die before his child is at university or getting hitched than this 62 year old new mother... obviously that doesn't warrant the same horrified and indignant screeches as this case does. What-fucking-ever.
    I'm almost certain I've commented on that subject here before. At the time, I was pretty shocked. I certainly didn't think "what a stud", more "what a prat". As far as I'm concerned, 72-year old men should be getting on with things other than having children. The tabloid press only covered that story extensively so they could get in lots of jokes about viagra tablets, anyway. It's still my view now.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How is people criticising the 2 parents at any chance they get going to help to the parents or the child.
Sign In or Register to comment.