I don't think they should mandate a certain age to be able to give birth to a child, but i do believe it's morally wrong to have a baby so old.
1) The rate of birth defects goes through the roof after you turn 40
2) Unfortunately we don't live forever. That poor child won't have her mom t here for her wedding, graduations, or any other important events that happen when you're an adult because she'll probably be dead.
3) REALLY how great of a parent can someone that old be? Things are soooo different than when she was growing up.
I think that age 41 is about the right cut off date for having babies.
2006-07-04 23:02:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Who am I to judge what an individual can or can't do, in this so called 'free society': or rather a world gone crazy!!??
While I agree that every woman has the God given right to bare children, to be a mother, and have a family etc: there also has to be a line of 'Common Sense' drawn somewhere... If for no other reason than for the 'Child's' sake!!
If a woman has a child at 62: she will be '78' by the time the child is 16 years old... Just about to start out on the most important stage of his or her life!!
There is every possibility that before this time, the mother & farther could have 'Both' sadly past away!!
Who will be there to take care and support the poor orphan child then?
In my oppinion... which I know many will disagree with for 101 different arguments and reasons:-
'Parents' should not concider having any/more children, if there is a 'Chance' that their life will end due to old age/anything related to: before the son/daughter reaches adulthood (i.e. 21) and is emotionally and physically able to support themselves: and cope with the loss of his or her parent!!
Any Doctor who would allow a woman to become pregnant, and give birth to a child she may not be there to support until this time: should be 'Struck Off' for breach of ethics!!
There is a saying:-
'A Dog is for life, not just for Christmas'!!
Think about it!!!!
2006-07-05 03:38:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by englands.glory 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If that 62-yr old is about to give birth (good grief!), she obviously isn't "too old"... because it's happening. Sure, it's a biological oddity, but it's undeniable if it occurs... so, wherein is there a question as to whether the woman's age is a debatable factor?
Do you mean to ask if a woman that age should or not be 'allowed' to become pregnant and give birth? Why? Do you feel that women at some age shouldn't be allowed to have a child? Should they be required to have their child aborted because the idea seems somehow offensive or disgusting to you? I don't understand what it is that you are either asking or perhaps saying.
How old is 'too old'?... I'd love to answer the question(?), but don't understand it. Too old. Too old for what? Who or what too old for what? Nope... I just don't know what you're asking.
Should there be 'age limits to fertility help'... what's that about? Birth control? "Fertility help"... again, I just don't know what you're getting at-- I've never encountered that term, UNLESS.... are you referring to women who have a problem becoming impregnated?
But again, you bring up the issue of 'age limit(s)'. Is ALL of this related to the issue of the aged woman having a child?
Wish I could help, but I can't determine the question(s) here... I'm only able to share your amazement in the news item that a 62-yr old woman is about to give birth to a child. Yep, it's incredible but true...
2006-07-04 23:41:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by nomad 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes i think it is too old mainly because it isn't fair on the child. If she's 62, when the child is 10 then she'll be 72. Will the child be able to live a normal life like the rest of his/her friends, or will he/she have to give up her childhood to care for their mother? Also the woman will be too old to be able to do many things, and just won't have the energy. Nature stops women having babies at a certain age for a reason.
2006-07-04 23:05:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by . 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes I do think that 62 is too old for a woman to have a baby as she may die before the child is an adult. What I have noticed in all the answers is the fact that no-one seems to mention men. They can still have children in their 60s even 70s no-one seems to think it's too old for men but it is for women. I think that this is double standards. If older men do get their partners pregnant obviously much younger partners - society seems to think this is ok but not for women. I think both women and men should stop having children in their 40s and even that is a bit old to be honest.
2006-07-04 23:57:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by missieclass 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
40
2006-07-04 23:03:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by poppy-dayz 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
40
2006-07-04 23:00:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mike Laz 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, I think sixty is too old. Most women can not have a baby at this age. BUT if they are able to think about this. Some of them will die before their kid finishes school. Most will NEVER EVER see their grandchildren. I (my opinion) don't think women should have babies after 40 - 45 years of age.
2006-07-04 23:05:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by GRUMPY 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't know how some one suffering senility can raise a child, what will she do forget the baby at the bingo hall????? Or have a heart attack giving birth...Who will look after the baby when she dies of old age,let alone see the child graduate or get married...40 tops! The men get away with it because they dont raise the child or they walk off when they have enough of the crying.....
2006-07-04 23:58:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by LadySym 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think 62 is way too old i mean can you imagine the child going to school and everyone thinks that his/her mother is their grandmother. She will be 83 when the child turns 21. I think people in their 40's is the right age to stop playing house.
2006-07-04 23:04:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋