Those poor babies are not yet 1.
I think however strong her need for a child, she was wrong to go ahead.
Yes I know any woman can get cancer at any age, but at 66 it is more likely that you are not long for this world.
2007-12-12 22:24:49 · 13 answers · asked by !Lady Stormy! 5 in News & Events ➔ Other - News & Events
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501267&in_page_id=1811&ct=5
2007-12-12 22:25:02 · update #1
The strong hormone treatment given during IVF to women could cause some cancers e.g. breast or ovarian cancers
It doesn't say what type of cancer she has, but maybe the IVF treatement caused or hastened it.
Very sad story. Given that so many of us are likely to develop cancer in old age anyway, it is a selfish act to have children so old.
2007-12-12 23:48:23 · answer #1 · answered by bec 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i think of it somewhat is incorrect and selfish,extremely with their given motives that they needed an inheritor. i understand human beings could spout the regularly used info that anybody can die at any time and so on yet once you chosen to have a new child at 70 that's a forgone end which you is in basic terms not around to advance that new child! So for all them desiring an inheritor they gained't be there to effect his upbringing so how will they make useful he grows as much as be the son they needed? additionally what with reference to the female twin,is she in user-friendly terms a spare area? All so very incorrect!
2016-10-02 08:55:17 · answer #2 · answered by pinal 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
She very selfish person, she didnt consider the needs of the children she was just thinking about her needs.If she wanted children then she should have had them when she was younger, i know illness can strike at anytime but she would have had more family around to help with the babies.There should be a age cut of period for ivf.
2007-12-12 22:34:49 · answer #3 · answered by pauline will never give up.xx 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Regardless of her basic good health, she had to be aware that having the twins would take a humongous toll on her body, leave alone looking after them!
I feel for her, but hope that this will be a lesson for all older mothers before they indulge themselves.
2007-12-12 22:34:53 · answer #4 · answered by Christine H 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I have to agree with Dave s she has been incredibly selfish I would love to have another child in the family, but I know I will just have to wait until one of my sons decide to produce a grandchild and that's the way it should be ,you have children when your young and grandchildren when your older.
2007-12-12 22:58:46 · answer #5 · answered by ǝuoʎʞɔɐʍ 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
While I sympathize with her need to have children, not only was she beyond childbearing age, but she was single! She had double the risks of leaving her children with no one to care for them.
Is it an offense to lie to a fertility clinic? It should be.
2007-12-13 02:49:12 · answer #6 · answered by True Blue Brit 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yeah, read this story yesterday......we can be as judgemental as we want about this lady and the choices she made but....its still a tragedy.... she didnt know what was round the corner, my nan is nearly 90 and still going strong, none of us know how long we are going to live x
2007-12-12 22:31:54 · answer #7 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes I agree.I think it was a very selfish decision to have children at that age.Its obvious that your health deteriorates the older you get.What was she thinking?
2007-12-12 23:14:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
which is why we have a cut of point to being able for child bearing, its a sad case regardless
2007-12-12 23:30:55 · answer #9 · answered by dollyk 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Morning stormy ~ I totally agree with you. To lose your mother when you are still young is very cruel.
2007-12-12 22:29:02 · answer #10 · answered by Chris 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋