What do you think about motherhood beyond 50?

Question

A 67 year old woman who had to sell her house to raise money for IVF treatment lied about her age (claimed she was 55) to have children. Now she is looking for a younger man as a companion who can help her raise her children. While a person should have the freedom to do as she chooses, my personal take is that she is selfish since she did not think about the children in case of her death. Not to mention the thoughtlessness of fertility clinics. Should late IVF be restricted after 50? Thoughts?

Answer 1

I think it's selfish too. Do these people even stop to think how old they are going to be when their kids are teens? Sure, 50 isn't that old but when the kid is 20 they're going to be 70! That is old! Although a 20 year old may be pretty grown up, as a 20 year old I can say I sure as hell wouldn't want to be looking after my elderly parents during my twenties and then have them die on me before I hit 30. It just wouldn't be fair.
I know it's sad that some women may not have been able to have children when they were younger when IVF wasn't around, or wasn't as effective, but that's just a fact of life. Women have had to deal with infertility for thousands of years, and these 50+ women should, as hard as it may be, just accept that they have missed the boat and move on.
That may sound harsh but there is a reason it is extremely difficult for women to concieve naturally after a certain age - it's against nature for women to be having babies at that age.

Answer 2

Very brave from medical point of view however not very responsible considering that when the child will reach 10th birthday the mother will be over 60... more like a grandmother... also there are more chances for the child to become an orphan just too early. However, to preserve personal freedom for all women no law against old mothers should be introduced. I know cases when a woman was trying to get pregnant all her life without any positive result, she even adopted a child... and then boom... she got pregnant being 50...

Answer 3

A baby is a blessing. It is also none of my business when an adult woman wants to become a mother.
My great-grandparents and grandparents have all lived into their 90's and beyond. My great -aunt is 105 and has outlived 6 of her 7 children. There is no telling how long someone will live or what their future health may be.

By the time I was 28 - I had three beautiful sons and was expecting my daughter. My doctor informed me that I was too old he didn't believe women over 25 should have children. So my experience with the medical field is slightly tainted and I don't believe half of what is said. He could give no valid reasoning other than a parent needs to be young to enjoy a child .

Answer 4

Well, someone can die at any time and leave the children parentless, but I think that as long as the parent (mother or father wanting the child at an old age) is physically and mentally fit, and can raise a child, then they should be able to have one. Of course, I think that 67 is too old to have a child, but if you can raise the child and give them exactly what a parent would who's 20 or 30 years younger, then why not.

Answer 5

I think that is one of the most selfish things I've ever heard of. She has virtually guaranteed her child the ordeal of dealing with the death of the child's mother at a young age. Even if she survives long enough for the child to grow up, it will be a huge burden on the child to have a parent that old.

Answer 6

I think someone is fibbing or she needs to be reported to the World Book of Records! I do a lot of reading and I don't think I have ever heard of a 67 year old birthing a child be it invetro fertilization or the old fashion way. Who's leg you trying to pull.

Answer 7

I think it is very dangerous to treat somebody to IVF at such an advanced age. It's not unheard of for a woman to have babies that late but to actively seek a pregnancy in that way i think is dangerous to both the woman and the child should she conceive.

Answer 8

because all of those so-noted as "rights" are very open to interpretation. lets start up with Article 24, the "correct to relax and leisure." Who determines how a lot is a "sensible" hindrance on artwork hours? The corporation, the worker, or the authorities? The corporation would want workers to artwork 40 hours per week, and a pair of weeks vacation to be aggressive, notwithstanding the worker would in user-friendly words want to artwork 30 hours (yet receives a fee for 40), and performance 6 months vacation. the authorities might want to be inspired by technique of whichever particular pastime will pay them off extra. Who defines "sufficient" known of residing? Does that mean each and every kinfolk receives a house large sufficient so everybody has their own bedroom and bathroom, even with in the adventure that they could't have the funds for it? Then who will pay for it? And what "social safe practices" are moms and children entitled to? Such obscure definitions are recipes for economic and social mess ups. the yankee structure ensures rights that are particular and person-friendly experience, like the right to free speech, to own a gun on your own safe practices (no longer to seek or shoot different human beings), and the right no longer to have your rights taken away on the whims of the authorities.

Answer 9

In the past, women's natural cycles made this a mute point. Now, thanks to technology, its possible for a 67 year old female to become with child.
I'll be frank, its a stupid decision, very unfair to the child, and shouldn't be allowed. What was the point, her ego? Now a child will be left without its mother at a very early age - all because one woman decided SHE wanted a child.

Answer 10

I know 80 year women that take bertter care of themselfs than some of these 35 year old bags that sit around and complain about everything. More enregy and a zest for life. It seems that todays women are lazy and listless by the time they hit 35 or 40