NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11960978%255E13762,00.html

What do people here think of this? I think it’s sad, ludicrous and disgusting. It’s so obvious that this is a grab for some sort of fame or money on behalf of the “mother”, not to mention the clinic and doctors involved. 9 years of fertility treatment! Take a hint. The human body is not meant to keep spitting out kids until it expires! It’s not healthy for the mother or the offspring!. That’s what menopause is all about. Stupid people screaming “But I’m still young!” through their wrinkles and the fog of dementia. :mp5:

How can this woman possibly care properly for this child? If indeed the child survives. :( She will probably be dead before the kid is 10! What about developmental abnormalities? The chances for conditions like Downs Syndrome, etc increase with every year older the mother is (once she’s past 30ish anyway).

Realitatea TV sounds pretty suss, too. :gundge: Big Brother: meet Geriatric Mother! It’ll be a smash hit! Viewers can watch the mother change the baby’s nappy and then her own!!! :eek: Oh yeah - wonderful. :headbang:

It seems to me that the welfare of the child/ren that resulted from this treatment was the last thing to be considered. If it was at all…




Well, there’s my mildly stated opinion ;) . What’s yours?

My aunt was like 45 and 46 when she gave birth to my cousins. Now I'm sure the poor kids have down syndrome. One of them is 5 and can't even talk very inteligibly.

Where is 'reality' TV mentioned?

Here's a good rule, once you're past 40. Stop having babies.

old people shouldn't have kids. if they're so desperate they can just adopt.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11960978%255E13762,00.html

What do people here think of this? I think it’s sad, ludicrous and disgusting. It’s so obvious that this is a grab for some sort of fame or money on behalf of the “mother”, not to mention the clinic and doctors involved. 9 years of fertility treatment! Take a hint. The human body is not meant to keep spitting out kids until it expires! It’s not healthy for the mother or the offspring!. That’s what menopause is all about. Stupid people screaming “But I’m still young!” through their wrinkles and the fog of dementia. :mp5:

How can this woman possibly care properly for this child? If indeed the child survives. :( She will probably be dead before the kid is 10! What about developmental abnormalities? The chances for conditions like Downs Syndrome, etc increase with every year older the mother is (once she’s past 30ish anyway).

Realitatea TV sounds pretty suss, too. :gundge: Big Brother: meet Geriatric Mother! It’ll be a smash hit! Viewers can watch the mother change the baby’s nappy and then her own!!! :eek: Oh yeah - wonderful. :headbang:

It seems to me that the welfare of the child/ren that resulted from this treatment was the last thing to be considered. If it was at all…




Well, there’s my mildly stated opinion ;) . What’s yours?
the same problems exist for males of that age range; it is far more likely that the man's sperm will be defective, that he will die before the child reaches adulthood, et cetera et cetera. yet for some reason nobody objects to males fathering children at advanced ages.

How can it be a grab for fame? she's in romania for gods sake, do they even have tv?

My God, 67. Thats just wrong, she will be dead before the child is 5 and what will then happen? The child will probably live in foster homes for along time.

My aunt was like 45 and 46 when she gave birth to my cousins. Now I'm sure the poor kids have down syndrome. One of them is 5 and can't even talk very inteligibly.

You don't have to guess whether or not they have Down's Syndrome. If they did, it'd be pretty obvious.

Where is 'reality' TV mentioned?The TV station that seems to be in control of any and all statements being released is called "Realitatea TV". I would have expected the doctors concerned to be trumpeting their "expertise" all over the media, but all the quotes seem to come through the TV station. I grant that I may be paranoid, but given the pestilential spread of so-called "reality" TV, it would be sadly unsurprising. I wouldn't even be surprised if it was some sort of "Truman Show" deal where the company "adopts" the child if/when the mother dies.

Perhaps (hopefully) I'm too cynical. I hope so.

It still doesn't detract from the irresponsibility of a woman that age having a baby in the first place.

EDIT:the same problems exist for males of that age range; it is far more likely that the man's sperm will be defective, that he will die before the child reaches adulthood, et cetera et cetera. yet for some reason nobody objects to males fathering children at advanced ages. Er... I do and for much the same reason. The chances of disability or complications with the health of the foetus/baby. Also, they are physically generally unable to cope with the demands of a pregnancy - baby - toddler - child.

1. the sperm and the eggs came from younger people. So Downs syndrome is not an issue.
2. people in that region can live a very long time. She might make it til the kid is 10.
That said, it's not brilliant to have kids at an advanced age. They have too much energy and are frankly much too sneaky!
I have a problem with artificially producing children at ANY age. a. there really are a lot of children who need to be given homes. b. it's the slippery slope to genetic engineering, something I personally feel more bothered by even than I am bothered by abortion.
3. This is a HUGE j***m* ego trip for the doctor.

I'm suire this particular lady will do a good job, she's wanted children for a very long time, we are not there to judge, but still, she really is awfully old for this. I noticed no mention of a father or a husband. That is troubleing.
Some people want kids way too much. That is not a good thing. I find the people who want kids terribly have the most trouble having kids. I didn't really care if I had kids or not, I had two, they've turned out nicely, but if I hadn't had kids I would not now be going nuts over that fact.
I'd be living my life doing other things. No one needs to have more than two kids anyway. Don't have more than you can grab or whack if neccesary. Or as I said before, don't have more kids than you have hands.

the same problems exist for males of that age range; it is far more likely that the man's sperm will be defective, that he will die before the child reaches adulthood, et cetera et cetera. yet for some reason nobody objects to males fathering children at advanced ages.

I do, for one. But I suppose it's generally more socially acceptable for men to do things like.

I grant that I may be paranoid, but given the pestilential spread of so-called "reality" TV, it would be sadly unsurprising. I wouldn't even be surprised if it was some sort of "Truman Show" deal where the company "adopts" the child if/when the mother dies.



Thats beyond wild speculation, thats just stupid.

If my mum had quit at 44 I wouldn't have been born. And I'm fine.

My aunt turned 40 just after giving birth to her daughter. And they're both great. Evie's gonna make a incredible pianist one day (K, she's only 8 months, but she plays piano with me, and gurgles along to the tune. It amuses her for HOURS at a time).

True, she wasn't planned though... and having fertility treatment in your 60s IS a bit extreme...

My aunt was like 45 and 46 when she gave birth to my cousins. Now I'm sure the poor kids have down syndrome. One of them is 5 and can't even talk very inteligibly.
my older brother has downsyndrome he can talk straight.