What do you think about the 67 year old mother?

Question

personally, i think it's extremely selfish on her behalf: by the time her kids are eighteen, she'll be eighty five...you could say "well as long as she's a good mother, then it doesn't matter", but even if she's the best in the world, she's not gonna live for most of their lives, so it's practically guaranteeing they won't have a mother by the time they hit 20..i know she lied about her age, but how can a clinic let it happen? shouldn't there be a birth certificate or some sort of document involved? i think IVF is a great thing, but nature has its laws and maybe exceding them a bit is fine, but 67...that's just wrong (in my opinion). their mum is probably going to be older than most of their friends' grandmothers! what are your thoughts? also, anyone who can fight my argument to try and change my mind is very welcome.

luckily, though, she's had twins, so at least they've got eachother,

budding author, well done, you got through to me! lol, you've raised some points worth thinking about, although i still stand by my initial feeling. i agree that kids ae better in the care of a parent than in a foster home, but it's not like these kids were already born, hey didn't even exist. i feel she had them to satisfy her own needs, but of course i can't know her real reasons, so i'm being a bit unfair in judging her this way. obviously i do wish her the very best, as i would do anyone, because no one deserves to do badly or be hated for a decision (i don't hate her, i'm just debating the subject). i see all your points, i know i come across as close-minded, but that's why i asked this question, to try and get some different points of view.

Answer 1

Having read your question and budding authours response I still say its WRONG!!!!

Although i do agree with the point that if they were her grandchildren and the parents had been killed in a car crash it would not be unreasonable for her to raise them but thats the point: THEY WOULD NOT BE HER CHILDREN!!!! And thats the bit I have an issue with: how can a clinic allow this to happen (yes I know she lied about her age and all that) but in my opinion 67 is pushing it a little too far. I am all in favour of people wanting to have children as late in their life as possible but there is a little part of me that says did she do it for the joy of having children or did she do it for the huge amounts of money she has made selling her story to tabloids and magazines that will in turn heighten the interest of the public and maybe get a spot on a few TV programmes thrown in (all for a small fee of course)

Yes i sound cynical but its one thing having to look after your childrens children because of something horrible but its another thing giving birth when you are PAST the age of retirement and I just think its wrong

Plus you have to consider that it will throw the benefits agency into a complete tailspin because they wont know whether to pay her family allowance or her pension!!!!!

Answer 2

I'm not going to try and fight your point or even change your opinion, just give you another way of looking at the situation
You point out quiet rightly they wont have a Mother by the time they are 20. Their Mum is going to be older than their friends Grandmothers etc etc. All very valid points.
Now let us just suppose that this 67 year old women had a couple of children when she was around 25 years old, her children were killed in a car crash{ please keep in mind this is all 'suppose') They left behind their two very young kids!
Are you suggesting that this 67 year old next of kin should not be allowed to bring them up becauseof the reasons you have given in your question? Would they be better off in a kids home and possibly be adopted at some time.? What do you really think?
The way she went about getting these children is of course a matter of debate, I was glad to note that you didnt mention the religious aspect !
And strangely enough I agree with the bit that you dont want to hear about, as long as shes a good Mother then it doesnt really matter , the kids will love her, she has brought them into the world, she has given them life and hope and asperation, good luck to all her family, I really hope she has many friends who will stand by and support her, we know she will have a lot of haters, I wouldnt wish that on anyone in her position..
Changed your mind just a little bit?? Or not at all??

Answer 3

That's a hard question. Every woman has the right to become a mum, however, i feel it is too old on the gounds that the odds are against her for seeing her children grow up and the upset and trama that those young children will go through when they lose her will be awful, I also think that IVF is wonderful for those that desperately want children but naturally cannot have them, however to indulge a woman of her age is just madness, no one has thought of those children in all of this, I agree with you.

There should be a system in place where all age etc has to be proven by i.e passport, that cannot be faked.

Answer 4

The main thing is if she has people the children will bond with and who will be with them and for them after she has died.
The physical stamina required in taking care of little ones leads me to think she already has people in place.
Sadly, those children will not have grandparents, prolly not much in the way of aunties or uncles.
At the same time, I can not say she was bad nor necessarily irresponsible. Perhaps both mother and children are special people with something wonderful to offer the world.
It is not for me to judge too harshly.
--That Cheeky Lad

Answer 5

Woman at that age do not have bodies that are totally capable of fully nourishing an unborn child to be sure it gets a good, healthy start at life. Woman at that age are not physically able to care for and nurture a child from newborn to 18 on a 24/7 basis.

My initial thought was "what was she thinking?". I don't understand what she is trying to prove here and obviously she is trying to prove something.

Answer 6

I agree with you. I thought it was weird that she claimed to be 55, isn't that a bit old anyway? I thought it was. It would be very hard for a woman of that age to relate to her kid and, I can't even imagine she's going to be able to play with it properly and that in a few years. I would have thought a woman that age would have trouble managing a kid as it is, I can't imagine how she'll manage when the kid is, say, 7 and she's 74!

Answer 7

You have to make the most of any situation you are in.Who are we to say that age has a bearing on child birth.What if this child was born unto younger parents who say for example abused them, neglected them etc.I think it is the amount of love that a child is given that is important and i think that this child is going to be shown a hell of a lot of love because they were born in a special and rare circumstance

Answer 8

I had my twins at 30 and was exhausted!!!! I hope that she knows what she got herself into. I think that she was being selfish having these babies but what is done is done. I just hope that she has someone that can take over raising these children if something should happen to her.

Answer 9

I question her motives.Does she just want to be the centre of attention and sell her story!.It is utterly selfish or has she gone mad or senile.?She is already a bad mother bringing children into this already difficult world and saddling them with a selfish geriatric old mother.

Answer 10

I think it is our resbonsibility to think of our children and not just ourselves. Modern technology is making us lose sight of the "just because you can doesn't mean you should" theory. It is this sort of thinking that is going to lead to designer babies, clones etc. (I understand that cloneing can be used for medical purposes as well)
She shouldn't make her children suffer just because she feels like she wants a baby.