Tina Mallone Pregnant at 50(324 Posts)
AIBU to think it is crazy that Tina Malolne (from Shameless) is pregnant at 50 by donor egg?
Yabu. None of your business.
That's a tough one! There are two sides to every coin. Yes because of obvious reasons but then again your only as old as you feel. My dh's cousin had baby at 45. And there great 4years on. If anything she feels younger and is more active. But pregnancy was rough ordeal.
Uh, no. That makes me tired just thinking about it.
is she asking you to care for it? no? then it doesn't matter what you think about it.
Tbf she was so fat for years previously that she will prob be healthier and have more energy now than she would have 10 years ago.
I saw her make the announcement on This Morning today.
She looks fab, has lost tons of weight and doesn't look her age at all, and has a lovely partner.
I wish her all the luck in the world.
She is only 5 weeks, I hope it all goes well.
I'm 44 with an 18 month old and for me thats the limit. Its not whether I'll cope now but about supporting through uni. Assuming she only does 4 years I'll be retiring not long after she finishes.
I am pleased for her. It's what she really wanted, she must be thrilled.
not sure I would have announced on national tv at 5 weeks though.
I thought she had been ttc for a while so the baby is planned and wanted.
I agree she is probably fitter and healthier than before and she has a partner.
I am happy for her.
It is her business yes, but she is the one who chose to have the camera following her even while she was peeing on a stick..
Surely that alone is enough to invite public comment.
She is just as ridiculous as Denise Welch.
she'll be a pensioner by the time her child is a teen...not fair on him/her
God she's a brave brave woman. Or foolish. I can't tell which
"she'll be a pensioner by the time her child is a teen...not fair on him/her"
Thats not really here or there anymore considering we live a lot longer than we used to (when pensions first came into effect), and her partner is also a lot younger than her, so would the same comment be made about a man of 50 having a child?
I agree - it is unfair on the child.
It isnt unfair on the child...
Would you say the same if a younger but disabled woman with life limiting illnesses had a baby?
She is only 50. Hardly one foot in the grave.
There have been women in their late forties that have conceived naturally.
She's only a few years out, and yes people are living longer these days.
50 is no great age.
Funny how no-one mentions that a man is too old to be a father when he has a kid past 50, but if it's a woman!? <clasps pearls>
'Would you say the same if a younger but disabled woman with life limiting illnesses had a baby'
I'd say that was worse tbh (unless by life limiting you mean she was going die at 70 or something).
I say good for her if this is what she clearly wants. Sometimes it's not possible to have children younger, might not have found a partner or have problems with pregnancy. I became a Mum for the first time last year just before I turned 40. But I had six miscarriages before that so would have been a first time parent aged 34 if it had all gone ok. I still want to try for another one, my age does worry me a bit, and is another reason to try and give DD a sibling.
She already has a child. She wanted a child with this partner, so traveled to Cyprus for a donor egg as could not do it in the UK.
I just think she is an attention seeking idiot for going public with something so early, and for what gain other than to get her face in the media.
Have a baby, fine, but just go and do it privately.. the world does not need to know.
Why poor kid ?
It looks like its going to be a very much loved and wanted kid with two loving parents.
Apparently there's the chance it may be twins too
Nobody has mentioned a man of 50 as we are discussing this case. And yes, if by life limiting illness or condition you mean significantly life shortening then having a child you know you definitely will be leaving mother/fatherless very early in life of course it's wrong and selfish.
Her husband is 30ish. the kid will be fine.
lisaro It must be nice living in a world where everything is just so black and white.
I don't know how I feel about her being pregnant at 50 but am that she is going so very public about it so early. Is she one of these people who seem to live their entire life through the tabloids/trash TV, like Denice Welsh and Kerry Katona?
Oh and I was talking in general, hand-wringing panic if a woman has a child later on in life, barely a mutter if a man does. She may live to be ninety, she could die the very next day, no-one knows and age absolutely doesn't determine someone's ability to be a parent.
I saw her on the Jeremy Kyle show (my guilty secret) and he grilled her on having ivf at 50 and she that younger mums could die tomorrow, they both seem in love and seem to have thought it through, she said she would have 3 goes and if it wasnt successful they would buy a puppy. She said over the last two years she gone gone from a 28 to a 8 and her body is healthier than it has ever been.
I get the impression the baby will be very much wanted and loved, dont really see a problem with it, good luck to them
SparhawkI would imagine it would be very nice to live the life you want with bugger all thought for the consequences for anybody else.
At current estimates, which are likely to go up in the next few years, the child would still have just under 30 years of having a mum around, and 45/50 years of having the dad around. I can't get outraged by that really.
You're right, because clearly people with life-limiting illness think, 'Fuck it! I'll have a child because I can,' with absolutely no thought or consideration about what might happen.
I would say she's made it her business by announcing it on National TV at five weeks
I don't warm to her personally but I'm sure that won't bother her.
YABU. I'm pleased for her. She looks in the best physical shape she's been in years, she's in a good relationship and doesn't look near 50. I hope it all goes well or her
And the fact that her husband is '30ish' doesn't mean he's going to be around for more than five minutes.
Good luck to her I say, obviously not something she has decided on a whim.
I can't imagine having a baby at 50 (or even 40 for that matter), but good luck to Tina & her husband.
I was really moved by their story on TV this morning.
Not everyone has textbook lives. She's met this guy later in life, she's got herself slim & healthy and they seem to have their heads screwed on.
I really hope it works out for them.
I think it's lovely. It's an awful feeling to desperately want to have a baby and not be able to have one, so I'm glad it is now possible for older women to have this option. People live longer and work longer these days, so we are not 'old' in the way that previous generations were by 50 iyswim.
I also think it's important from an equality pov that women have the same opportunities as men - if the dad was 50 no one would be even commenting.
Best of luck to her and her dh.
My nana was 50 when she had my mum (thought she was having the menopause). My mum says she hated it having such an old mum and dad and had lost both her parents by the time she was 14,it had a huge impact on her life.
Having spent some time with the women, it's her personality rather than her age that makes me feel sorry for the child ....
My great gran had her last child naturally at 52 (unplanned and very unexpected) and she always claimed that it kept her young. She lived to 94, was the first in the family to get a CD player and had a really positive, forward thinking attitude. Not sure I'd want to still be changing nappies 35 years after having my first child though!
I don't really know her story so can't really comment on her case.
However, if it is just a case of she is with a younger man and wanted a baby with him so he can have a child of his own then then no, I don't really agree. Most men who get with a lady approaching 50 will realise her baby days are over. I personally think when your body stops you being able to get pregnant (and I am talking about people without fertility issues here) then it is time to stop!!
I don't know though, was she trying for years and if so then I can sort of understand.
My mum had me when she was 33 and in those days that was considered old. However, she died when I was 39 and I wish she had had me younger so that I could have had some more years with her.
However, life not black and white so I honestly don't know whether Tina Malone is unreasonable or not although I do sway more to the unreasonable camp.
'Having spent some time with the women, it's her personality rather than her age that makes me feel sorry for the child ....'
Chelvis, I don't know her from Adam but I remember watching her on Celebrity Big Brother a few years ago and she was vile - bullying and argumentative and loud and just seemed dreadful to be around. And she used to bite her toenails! <puke>
Is she still married to the same bloke she wed on Celebrity Four Weddings?
'She said younger mums could die at any minute' Yeah, but there's a lot less chance of that happening than there is a woman in her sixties dying. Also it is now our business, she's made it our business by going into details and making a big announcement live on TV. So really we're open to be as judgemental as we want, she's invited that.
It's selfish imo. If she dies at the average age then her kid will be 32. She might not live to see it have children or get married, definitely won't be fit enough to look after the children. That's IF she dies at the average age but she's been a lifelong heavy smoker and always been obese until the past couple of years so chances are she won't. Also I don't think it matters if you're in good health, nobody is as fit and energised at 50 as they were at 25, that's just the natural ageing cycle. She'll struggle keeping up. Even the UK's oldest mum admitted she shouldn't have done it.
She also has a 33 yo daughter who might be getting married and having kids herself soon. She'll be a grandma to kids younger than her own child. Odd, no? So yanbu, totally with you and she shouldn't have announced at 5 weeks.
My mum had me at 44 and died at 48. Growing up motherless has been hard, as a little girl but also as a woman with her own children.
A mother is needed for more than just the early years.
I know what I meant, her kid will be a similar age to her grandchildren, didn't come out right. And I agree with Betty, your body goes through menopause for a reason.
Lotta, I didn't watch it, but yes, it sounds like she represented herself accurately then ...
Good luck to her. Would it matter if it was the dad aged 50? My father is having a baby with his new wife, he is 53.
She is crazy! I want to see her at 60 dealing with a 10 year old.
I don't know who she is, but I say well done and good luck to her. I don't think her age matters a jot. I have a friend whose mother was 48 when she was born, and her mother is still going strong in her 90s. OTOH, one of my grandmothers died in her early 40s, leaving young children. There are no guarantees WRT health and longevity.
YABU! She's got a loving home to give and is (I assume) financially buoyant.
I saw her and her husband on telly this morning and they are over the moon.
Best wishes on a healthy, happy pg and baby.
This kind of thread is always VU. Leave people alone to get on with their lives.
I don't personally think it is a good thing. Nature gives the female body a 'time limit' on reproduction fit a reason. I hold she has a healthy pregnancy and a healthy, happy child.
My mum almost became a mother again in her early 50s. As it turned out it didn't happen, but there's no doubt in my mind she would have been brilliant. So what if she would have been retired by the time her child was 10? There are plenty of mothers I know who do a worse job in their 30s than my mum would have done in her 60s.
I'm absolutely not saying Tina Mallone would definitely be able to cope with a young child at this stage in her life, but that's not to say that no women over the age of 50 are capable of raising a child from scratch.
There are no guarantees in this life. However I can guarantee you that at least one of us posting here will probably die younger than 50.
Noone knows what's round the corner. People get sick, get killed and did at 24, others are fit and active at 70.
Life is for living not conforming to some stupid stereotype.
Good for her and I hope it goes well.
Do those of you who are saying its a bad idea parents? My guess is yes. My reason for asking is until you've suffers miscarriages & fertility problems you don't understand the ache of wanting a child. I never did til it happened to me. Hopefully I won't have to keep trying til I'm 50 but I I'm fit & healthy then I'll keep tryin to have a much wanted sibling for our DD.
But she hasn't had fertility problems though, she just wants a baby for her younger partner. Totally different kettle of fish IMO.
Icklemiss she has older children.
I have no idea who Tina Malone is, But I do think that 50 is too old to be having babies by Donor eggs. If she had conceived naturally ...ok then it happened...but IVF and donor eggs should be kept for younger mums to be ( as long as they dont already have children as then I disagree too), not people who are peri/ post menopausal.
Maybe she is being selfish but if that child is going to be loved & cherished then I don't see the problem. 50 isn't that old anymore - especially if you consider we are now expected to work intil we're nearly 80! I read somewhere that 50 is now considered middle aged. When I was young people retired in their mid-50's but as I've said that's entirely different now. I know people are concerned about the child growing up parentless but I have friends whose parents died when they were younger & their parents were in their 40s. No-one knows what the future holds.
Oh so bloody what... congratulations to her and I hope all goes well.
Best dad in the world ever (and now grandad) that i know of was a dad at 52 and then 57. My DD's grandad.
He is fantastic and I don't see why a woman can't be as well.
"but IVF and donor eggs should be kept for younger mums to be"
she paid for it privately, so I dont see the problem there..
She was declared bankrupt in 2012.
How did she then pay for the IVF?
OR could it all be a huge publicity stunt to flog a failing career?
Loved and cherished? Maybe but for how long?
Selfish and ridiculous decision.
I was an older Mum (but not as old as this) and I am in two minds. I think she is just sharing too much with the world tbh. I nearly did some shared IVF where I was ttc. I wanted to state I didnt want my eggs given to someone over 45, it never went very far because I got pregnant naturally but I am slightly uncomfortable with age limits being pushed and pushed and women in Indian for example being given more money the more drugs and eggs they produce.
I remember seeing Prof Winston travelling to Romania to visit the oldest women to give birth using donor eggs and I thought it was horrible. The women was nearly 70!
there will probably be all sorts of media appearance throughout the pregnancy that will keep her bank balance healthy...
she is a media whore..
She's made programmes about her IVF 'journey', hence the live reveal on This Morning.
Maybe that paid for her treatment.
I watched it this morning and my eyes nearly rolled out of my head! I looked like one of those poor charity shop dolls with their eyes rolled back and stuck
50 isn't old no....but I do think it is old to be having a baby.
If she had fallen pregnant naturally then fair enough but really....IVF/donor eggs at 50?
We all want things in life but sometimes I do think we need to accept that in some cases, the ship has sailed and it's too late. Of course, different if she had fertility issues but she didn't.
Actually the more I think about it the more I know she is being unreasonable.
If she is 5 weeks pregnant then that must be five weeks from first day of last period - or do they count it differently with ivf?
It's early to he sharing it with the world though.
Wish her well.
Putting aside the idea of fighting against nature/menopause do people think it's worse for a child to have an older mother/younger father than an older father/younger mother or that an older parent is a bad idea generally?
Why does it matter that she used donor eggs? I don't understand the posts saying that if she'd become pregnant naturally, that would be OK but donor eggs are somehow beyond the pale.
I don't think 50 is too old to have a child. My DH is over 50. Is it wrong for him to want another child? (BTW, I want one too!) Anyone who thinks they should have an opinion about our family choices can fuck right off.
I don't think its anyones place to make a judgment on this, who knows what anyone of us would do in similar circumstances.
I think she is BU to buy another woman's egg to create a child for her DH.
I am morally opposed to that.
As for her age, it seems very old to me but not really my business. I wouldn't do it personally. Wrt sharing every moment of "the journey" with the world, of course she is crass and vulgar. But then we knew that.
I think she is BU to buy another woman's egg to create a child for her DH.
I am morally opposed to that.
As for her age, it seems very old to me but not really my business. I wouldn't do it personally. Wrt sharing every moment of "the journey" with the world, of course she is crass and vulgar. But then we knew that.
My DM died at 52. She was a young woman in her pomp.
Who knows what tomorrow brings for any of us, regardless of age. Why the fuck are people putting a downer on someone else's happiness?
What are the chances of a 50 year old getting pregnant naturally?
KitchenandJumble, I'll fuck right off then, and go and care for my mother who is in her 80s, who I've had to support throughout my dds' childhood. My two are still young and I'm managing to fail everybody in the process. My Dad died, aged 80, before dd2 was even born, but if it hadn't been for the cancer I'd have been caring for a 90+ year old parent as well.
You need to understand that decisions you make about what you want at 50 have repercussions that don't just affect you, they affect the child, years down the line at the age when they might want children of their own. For those who say "oh, but people can become ill and need care at any age" - yes, that's true, but statistically that's more likely to happen to an 80 yr old than a 60 yr old.
valiumredhead 5% chance if conceiving naturally at 50 apparently.
"Nature" didn't create the menopause because 50yo women are too old to become parents ffs.
Statements claiming there are (or any other "nature...for a reason" opinions for that matter) suggest to me that there's some Earth Goddess making decisions about who should be born and to whom. Well there isn't.
There are eveolutionary theories suggesting that there was an advantage in having some grandmothers around to help look after their grandchildren. Maybe ceasing to be fertile meant that they were unencumbered by infants, or maybe it meant they were no longer running the risk of death in childbirth.
There are probably dozens of factors that made the menopause advantageous, but most aren't really relevant these days.
ArthurCucumber, you do that then. I don't need your opinion about my life. And please refrain from the patronising "You need to understand" nonsense. I understand just a wee bit more about my decisions than you do.
And I understand more about what you'd be letting a child in for, Kitchen. But I see I won't change your mind, and you won't change mine.
No, you absolutely do not. FFS. Who do you think you are?
I'm a person who is calmly disagreeing with you, Kitchen. No more and no less. I'm contributing to a thread with my own, valid experience.
Arthur makes valid points I think and ones that need considering imo. Sorry you are having a shit time, sounds very difficult.
Can't understnad all the negative comments on here. If the child is anything like mine s/he will be very independent by 16 or so and off to uni and have flown the nest by the time Tina is 68/9, so hardly geriatric. At least she won't be contributing to the awful situation where some people end up caring for their parents and grandparents.
Helen Mirren will be 68 in July - she is certainly not the sort of person you would be embarassed to have as your mother.
Good luck to her! There shouldn't be any medical reason for her not to go ahead with it, as long as she's healthy.
I doubt very much Kitchen is a fucking clueless arsehole. Her life (and Tina Mallone's life) their decisions.
I'm sure such a decision is never taken lightly and all potential consequences are thoroughly investigated and discussed.
I canny believe some people's self important attitudes.
Good luck Kitchen
Nope, sorry, Arthur. It's one thing to comment about something in the abstract or even about a public figure. But I'm talking about my life and my family's decisions, and I think you have overstepped the mark by saying that you understand the situation better than I do. You don't. You're wrong.
My dad died at 47 Arthur.
My mum died last year at 80.
I'm in my 50's but I still had to help care for her as she became helpless and had dementia, with a teenage son sitting important exams.
What happens in life is utterly random, TM could live till 90 and be as fit as a fiddle.
Her younger partner could be run over a bus next week. To decide not to do things in your life because of what could happen is no way to live.
All the Fucking came from Kitchen, as far as I can see. But yes, good luck with the decisions you make for yourself and your child.
Thank you, ItsallisnowaFeegle.
Why shouldnt she announce it at 5 weeks she might feel okay with the idea she'll have to tell people if she miscarries there is nothing shameful in losing a pregancy.
Some people who would want to be private: announce later
People who dont mind: Announce whenever.
I told everyone when I was 5 weeks PG... at 9 weeks I had to tell them same people I had lost the baby. Maybe she is a women like me who doesn't mind.
(I have also then had to tell most people due to certain things there probably won't be another pregnancy either)
I did comment in the abstract. None of us can tell the future, but none of us can pretend that a 60 yr old is less likely to need care than an 80 yr old. And if you ("one") have a child at 50, then by the time he/she is 30 (an average age to have young children) you ("one") will be either 80 or dead.
She actually said that in the interview AuntieEggy.
She knew it was early days, but would deal with it as and when it came.
There was also an equal chance that she would have a negative test, and she was prepared for that too.
Ok, I wouldn't do this on National telly but each to their own.
Her bloke does seem lovely too.
I have never heard of her before and it makes me tired to even think about having a child in my 50's and I too wouldn't bring a child into this world at that age because of the higher chance of dying or having health issues while the child is still quite young (and yes, I feel the same about men) but her decision so congrats to her.
No none of us can tell the future but there is a reason why a woman doesn't produce a child aged 50 naturally ordinarily.
The interview on This Morning can still be watched on ITV Player. It seems This Morning were following her IVF journey, so it made sense she would go on the programme to say it worked.
I think anyone having a negative opinion about a 50 year old having a baby needs to get out more.
It's irrelevant with an average life span of 80.
Yet more 'opinions' about how women run their lives
Following on from LadyBeagle; we all (those of us already blessed with DC) must die and leave our beloved children behind at some point (if we are lucky enough to go before them).
It doesn't become any easier IME to lose your mother depending on your age.
If children are brought into this world with love, then surely that's what truly matters?
I'd be more about this if she was single, but she's married, the child's father will only be in his early 30s.
I dont think its odd for someone to have grankids and children of similar ages either, my (half)sister was an aunt in the womb, My Mum had me at 20, then my sister at 30 (and she was toldwith her second husband (who was 40 at the time) his 20 year old Daughter and her husband had their first baby 6 weeks before my sis came along, so at 40 my stepdad had his first grandchild, followed by a child of his own 6 weeks later. Nobody has ever commented on it and I certainly dont think of it as odd,
Maybe you're talking in general, Laurie, as I was. But my opinion - which isn't in inverted commas as it's a real opinion, based on experience - isn't anti-women and their choices at all. I'm a proud feminist. In my first post on this thread I also mentioned my father, and his choice to have a child at 50+.
Families come in so many shapes and sizes these days, there is no norm.
This is a loving couple having a much wanted child.
How can anyone criticise that?
I think we all secretly have a cut off point age wise where it becomes a bit 'bleugh'. For me it is 50 tbh and less if you just hadnt got around to it.
For me it was seeing that Romania women who was at the time the oldest women in the world to have a donor egg. She looked about 80 and had no real visible means of support in a country that had its own troubles.
For me that was a step too far. There will of course be some doctor somewhere looking to beat that age...
OK, well putting aside the grandma stuff I waffled on about upthread, the reason human females experience the menopause is that they run out of decent eggs.
That is it.
Most animals don't appear have a period of age-related infertility before they die of old age. It's quite interesting really.
Mind, most animals don't get to die of old age I suppose.
LadyBeagleEyes, yes, love is important. I suppose I'm just saying that it isn't everything.
I'm sorry that you lost your mother, but have to say that your experience isn't the same as what I'm referring to. I imagine it's very hard to care for an aged and ill parent while your teenager sits important exams, and I'll know more about it when my time comes in a few years time. But I wasn't 50. I wasn't even 30 at the start, and it wasn't a teenager with exams - or not yet. I've been caring/worrying about elderly parents (in the plural, this isn't just about women) whilst trying to establish breastfeeding and sleepless nights, juggling appointments with baby's first injections, nursery and school pickups, and now with one at secondary and one at primary. It has coloured my entire experience as a parent.
Of course that might not happen to every child of a parent who wants a baby at 50. But statistically it is much, much more likely. I just think that when these discussions arise, too much note is given to how the parent will feel, how much energy they have, whether the child will be embarrassed, all about when the child is still small. And when people consider later years, they think in terms of the age at which the parent will die, and them not being able to help with their grandchildren. If only lack of help was our only problem.
But some people above on this thread (not you) howl Fuck Off at anyone who dares to suggest that it might not be all about the prospective parent and what they want. They assert their right to go ahead with their decision - which of course they're entitled to do - and then call me self-important, for sharing my experience and suggesting it's more likely to happen to children of older parents.
I know several men who've had kids in their late 40s and early 50s and no one seems to mention their age!
I know it's different because it's generally happened naturally (although in one case they've had IVF), and the woman has to carry the baby, but still...
I don't really follow sleb stuff at all, but I am really surprised at someone announcing it at 5 weeks - especially given her age.
I'm 49. I ovulate like clockwork each month. My DH only had to put his trousers on my bed and I'd get pregnant. I have no doubt that I could be pregnant if I wanted too (DH's vasectomy aside )
Whether I'd want to be is another story.
And I'm making these points because everyone's different.
As for a child having older parents, well both mine died young so I was parentless by my mid twenties. Yes it's hard but very do-able. Where there's be more of an issue is when youngish kids would need to care for increasingly infirm parents. But that happens in many families anyway for many reasons. It isn't ideal but with a wider network of support, it's not the end of the world either.
I am the wrong side of forty. I had to have an internal scan last year, and scan lady said I still have eggs. I was happy and sad at the same time.
The network of support is a good point, LetsFace. Having children at - maybe not 50 - but 40+ wasn't that unusual in the past, but that would mostly have been when families were larger, and the child born to older parents would have had siblings who could help with the care. Older siblings would have children who'd already grown up. I do have an older sister, but she recently (aged 59) has become very ill herself.
My mother died when I was 4. She was 48 and my father 52.
I was brought up by a sister who was 20 years older than me because my dying mother thought that would be best.
I can't tell you as a child how hard it was for a million reasons.
Missing my mother
Missing my brother
Feeling sad at other children having their mums
Feeling sad at seeing the relationship with their grandchildren
Not having any help, not being able to go for a coffee, not having her on mothers day.
I could go on.
Am I glad she had me? I'm not sure. Not having a mother has had a huge effect on me as a woman and as a person.
It's ok for a 50 year old to want a baby but that baby will grow up and still need you. But will you be around?
Arthur - I didn't direct my 'self important' comment to any specific objector, however, if you are identifying with the comment, you're very welcome to claim it.
Halle Berry's only four years younger. No one's up in arms about her pregnancy.
No one else's business IMO.
Not at all, Freegle, because I'm not being self-important at all.
But Everlong, your parents died young.
By rights they should have lived till their 80's or longer.
I'm 56, ds is 18 this year, I really don't think I'm old and about to die any time soon.
And I'm still completely compos mentis, fit enough
for a smoker, and see no reason why I won't be in 20 years time.
(posted too soon!) The reason I thought you were addressing me was that in the post that contained it you were backing up Kitchen, who I had dared to disagree with. If you weren't, that's fine.
I was definitely backing up Kitchen for her personal choices, however I wasn't directing my comment to anyone in particular.
I feel that this issue is far too personal an issue for people to say it's wrong. Who are any of us to decide what is best for anyone else?
If your parents hadn't decided they wanted you, you'd never have been and neither would your DC.
I understand it must be hard in your position, but you're here and so are your DC.
Life is hard no matter who we are Arthur. It's just hard, it's life.
- posted too soon also
It's hard but we all need to live it to the best of our abilities.
p.s it's Feegle, not Freegle
My point is to express what it's like to grow up without your mother.
The chances of a child growing up and having their mother when they are born to a 50 year old mother reduces greatly.
Of course life is hard no matter who we are. But this is an aspect of life on which I can comment from a side of the conversation that doesn't often get an airing. This is a parents' forum, so naturally most of what we discuss is from a parent's point of view. In this case I can see both sides - a parent, but also the grown-up child 30, 40 years down the line. To be honest, I was offended by the aggression.
I'm definitely glad I'm alive, and that my dcs are alive. But I still think my parents made the wrong decision. Those two things stand together, they don't have to cancel each other out.
LBE my dad was 84 when he died, my mother when dying didn't want him bringing me up. Whole other story.
In the past, many children grew up without their mothers because they'd died in childbirth. We live longer, and a child born to a 50 year old these days is more likely to still have a mother when they are an adult than a child born to a 25 or 30 year old 100 years ago.
People had children young because there was every possibility that they'd die at 40, especially at the lower ends of society. It's a non-issue isn't it? Especially as we can no longer afford to have children in the first flush of youth.
I believe it's something we 're going to get used to seeing more and more.
Yes, Nac Mac Feegle
I apologise if I offended you, however, my opinion, like yours is valid.
I'm just a Scottish sweary bastard and I disagree that both being happy to be here yet wishing your DP's had never had you sit comfortably together, I think that's a very somber statement.
It was more the "Fuck Off all ye who disagree" from the other poster. I think my opinion is valid, but people are going to be on the defensive for such personal decisions. Trouble is, there's no non-personal way to say something like that.
It's hard to explain what I mean about the "wrong decision" comment. I'm here now, and living my life to the best of my abilities . I'm not unhappy to be alive, but my parents made the wrong choice, and it was (long story) for the wrong reasons. It stands together in my own mind, but possibly not in my attempts at explanation!
Thanks again, Feegle. Very much appreciate your words of support.
I was disabled by the time I had my children, does that mean I am lesser somehow? So she'll be older? So what? You can take measures to ensure it doesn't impact negatively on your parenting.
Hi Arthur sorry if you've said but how old was your mum when she had you?
My mum was 42, everlong, but my Dad was 50 - in the early years it was my Dad's age that was the biggest issue, but the one followed on from the other - Dad is dead now and my Mum is in her mid-80s.
I'm sorry things are hard for you Arthur. I agree with all that you've said on this thread.
The point you make about that it's ok ( to a degree ) to have a baby at 50 but it's the 10, 20, 30 years down the line that it doesn't seem that people are thinking about.
I mean what 20 year old wants to be caring for a potentially ill parent of 70?
There's little thought for the actual baby, who will grow up in all this. It's just about the wants of the parents.
Kitchen, I really, really hope it works out for you. Why shouldn't we all attempt to fulfil our dreams and enrichen our lives?
Arthur, I'm sure it all makes perfect sense to you, however 42 is actually very young and I'm picking up subtle 'other' reasons for your stance. Ill health and being a parent's carer is not the same as saying someone in their 40's/ 50's shouldn't consider having children.
Thanks, everlong. I was just trying to put a different slant on things. Obviously people make their own personal decisions and none of us can see that far down the line. There are ill 50 year olds and healthy 75 year olds. But it's the likelihood that is hugely different.
Those of you saying it's ok and the parents right what about the right of the child?
Don't they deserve parents who are able to look after them properly, have enough energy, good health, appropriate finance etc?
Surely all those diminish into old age?
ever - caring for Ill parents is something I'll personally never experience as my mother passed as a very young woman, however, I'm guessing most children would be expected and very much willing to care for their parents, regardless of age.
Exactly Arthur. Losing my mum at the age I did will always have a negative effect on my way of thinking on this subject.
Yes, Feegle, 42 isn't old. It was my father's age that I was referring to, in my children's early years. That's why I didn't accept the notion that it's all about trying to limit women's choices.
What are the subtle other reasons?
But feegle I wouldn't want or expect a child of 20 to look after me at 70 when they should be living their life.
I should still be looking after them.
I was both expected and willing to care for my parents. But I'd have made a much better job of it if I'd not been trying to do it at the same time as bringing up my children. That's what I meant earlier, by "failing everybody". Things like when my dd1's long-awaited appointment for her scoliosis was on the same day as I'm taking my mother for an internal examination, that I have to escort her for as she's confused and can't hear well. I had to choose which one to postpone. That situation crops up all the time. I won't even get started on trying to work at the same time.
In my LA we have Foster Carers for children under 10, aged between 45 and 78, the 78 year olds have recently looked after a new born, until 8 months of age.
I have realised that i had to make a serious decision to look after my health, now i am hitting 45, i am healthier than i was 10 years ago, i also have more energy as a consequence of completely changing my diet. energy and coping levels are individual.
If everyone, regardless of age, thought about the issues highlighted on this thread, then the population would halve and tbf, most of the developing world should't be reproducing.
She is probably better equiped now to have a child than when she had her first and much better placed than many people i know, of all ages, in RL and on these boards.
I don't necessarily think being 50 would rule you out as being a good parent.
However I think if you're 50, a bankrupt ex-alcoholic with mental health problems and health problems associated with a life time of obesity and major surgery in the recent past, in a fairly short term relationship and quite a chequered relationship past.....well I think if you had the potential to be a decent parent you'd probably look at that and decide it probably wasn't a good idea.
everlong it's very unusual for 70 year olds to need care these days. Hell my Dad is 70 and has had multiple sclerosis for the last 18 years and he barely needs care. In general for healthy people it's not really and issue at 70.
For someone to need care at 70 these days there would have to be something seriously wrong, and with Tina Malone's history she certainly has the potential to be one of those people.
I was using 70 as an example because the child would still only be 20.
If you say an 80 year old then which is very feasible. The 30 year old child will quite possibly have a young family to look after. Like Arthur said previously it's difficult for them then to juggle the elderly parents and their children.
Other reasons such as how caring for your DM has had a massive impact on your life. It wasn't a criticism, only an observation from your posts.
In saying that, only we know the struggles that we face in daily life and how those individual struggles affect every aspect. For you, it's very obvious you disagree with women in mid-life having babies and that is, of course, your prerogative.
I, however, vehemently disagree due to my personal experiences and feel life is too unpredictable to decide against having a child, if that is your desire, and I genuinely don't believe that a woman of 50 is too old to start (or continue) a family.
I think the craziest thing is to announce it on This Morning at only 5 weeks.
If you say an 80 year old then which is very feasible. The 30 year old child will quite possibly have a young family to look after.
But this is how it is, isn't it? We take care of our elderly parents if/ when they need us to. If an individual was so ill that they were unable to take care of the 'basics' themselves, there are agencies who can help out and for those who need more intense support and practical help, there are retirement homes, supported living accommodation and nursing homes.
Don't they deserve parents who are able to look after them properly, have enough energy, good health, appropriate finance etc?
They deserve parents who love them. None of us can guarantee health and fitness, regardless of age. I look after my children properly, I get care in the home, and we work together to look after my children. I don't think it's fair to judge any circumstances to be honest.
I just happened to notice someone on another thread commenting that she has many friends in their 50s with children at primary school. I thought that was an interesting comment given the subject of this thread. So I suppose Tina M (whoever she is, I still don't know!) will not be the only older parent at the school gates.
Yabu. A lot of older moms out there and I don't think 50 is too old. I'd rather have an older mom with some wisdom and experience than some gymslip mom who lives next door to her family in the same home town and has very limited experience of life.
That said I would be scared to be this woman's child! She seems loud, barky, erratic and rough! Yikes.
Kitchen in all my 25 years at the school gate I've never seen a 55 year old mother with a child in reception. If I had I would definitely think it was the grandma.
The child's father will only be in his early thirties though, that makes it more of a Rod Stewart situation.
I think that's what it comes down to, Feegle. My caring responsibilities have coloured my dds' entire childhood and my own life, and it is solely because my parents chose to have me when older (they were healthy when younger). It's impossible to separate opinion from experience. Likewise, you don't (and won't) have the experience of this type of double caring. So you have a clearer mind on the subject, but I have more insight into one particular way that things can go, which is more likely statistically than if the parents were younger.
everlong, I was just repeating someone else's comment. However, I also have many friends in their 50s with young children.
No-one should announce a 5 week pregnancy.
it is utterly selfish.
Women have the ability to produce children naturally until they go through the menopause. There is a reason why women are unable to bear children at 50 - biologically they are not meant to do so. Implanting donor eggs and the like is wrong when it is just not meant to be the case.
As for those who say "well if it was a man would it be different?" yes of course it would. Because a man has the ability to father a child naturally at that age. A woman does not.
And the child will most likely lose his/her parent at an earlier age than would happen with most people who have children at an age when nature intended. not to mention the fact that it will be assumed that "mummy" is in fact "granny" at the school gates...
And to whoever said "if it was a younger disabled woman with a life limiting condition would you say the same?" absolutely. No-one has a right to have a child regardless of the cost to the child they seem to feel they have the right too have. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that it should.
wannaBe - Women actually do have the right to have a child, regardless of your opinion.
I started my period at 9...would it have been OK for me to have a child? AND I mean physiologically, NOT morally.
Life, all life, comes with difficulties and I, personally, have heard of much more selfish acts than bringing a much wanted baby into being.
I am disabled. I have two beautiful children. I don't think it was wrong to have my children (it was having them that triggered the health issues). And I don't think I am a terrible parent. Yes my son perhaps fetches and carries a lot more than any other seven year old, and they both have to see me on my worst days, but since that's all they've ever known, they don't question it. I am still a mummy, we do fun stuff. I can't take them out on my own much, but I can get help for that anyway, so we go away loads and do fun stuff, with help from carers and charity volunteers.
My children aren't damaged by me.
Good for you SomethingsUp, you sound like you're doing a great job. A friend of mine has been blind since birth and she is also a wonderful mother.
I'm very glad we no longer live in an era where being a disabled woman would have meant having no chance at motherhood.
" There is a reason why women are unable to bear children at 50 - biologically they are not meant to do so. "
The majority might not be biologically able to without help but that's not the same as not meant to.
But do you not think that not being able to have children later on in life is a big enough hint to why we aren't meant to?
She'll be utterly knackered at 65 dealing with a teenager.
Juule - strange thing to say. Of course if they were meant to they would be able to. Nature would have designed it so.
Wannabe, medical science has changed at a huge rate just in the last 50 years.
What was 'natural' is the accepted thing now.
It's the 21st century, we're not going back.
If we were I'd be dead of breast cancer.
The wonders of medicine means women who couldn't have babies can. Women who are willing to go through all the shit and hope of IVF who are going to be amazing mums, as I think TM and her partner will be.
We hear far too many stories of children abused by their 'loving' parents who just came naturally.
She's 50, so what, baby P's mum was in her 20's.
What does that tell us?
Everlong - no I don't.
Bowlersarm - do you really think its a strange thing to say? I don't. Nature does odd things sometimes. Maybe once upon a time there was a benefit to menopause that doesn't apply now and nature hasn't caught up. Maybe women were had enough eggs for a lifetime at one time and then lifetimes became extended but egg rations didnt? Who knows?
Agree with WannaBe
I don't think motherhood is a right. And definitely not to someone outside of natural child bearing age. It is absolutely a selfish act, and you certainly wouldn't be thinking it would be in the interest of the child.
Very odd Juule. Women stop producing eggs for a reason.
(Moving on from my points about elderly care...)
I think that disability, and infertility below the age of menopause, are very different, because they're a matter of individual circumstance, not our general biology.
With advances in science, many previously infertile women can now have children; and with proper support/living aids, many disabled women can now raise a family. That isn't going against natural, human biology. But it's a very different thing to implant eggs into a woman post-menopause, when it's completely normal biology for women to be unable to conceive.
Juule maybe the menopause is natures way of saying "enough is enough" in this increasingly overpopulated world. What possible benefit can there be to post menopausal women having babies? No benefit to the world and hard for the babies themselves growing up with elderly parents.
Wannabe you say it's ok for men to be older parents as nature keeps them fertile for longer. This aside what makes a 50 year old father a better parent than a 50 year old mother in real terms? Considering that the mother will more than likely have a longer life expectancy.
Excellent points, LadyBeagleEyes.
I don't know why I read this thread, I knew it would make me sad.
I had my DC at 42 and 45 after 11 years of infertility. DH is quite a bit younger. I know that I am a more patient, involved and healthy mother now than I would have been in my early thirties when I first wanted it.
I will look after my health more because of the DC, but I am aware there are no guarantees. I would say that not having children until later means having pensions, investments that mean I can afford care if I need it is a consideration.
Incidentally, I lost my mother at 6 months old (she was 32) and DH lost his 26 year old mother when he was six. Obviously not ideal, but neither of us would say it ruined our lives. There are no guarantees.
Everlong - the reason they stop producing eggs is because their supply has run out. But that can be overcome with a donor egg.
What reason do you think they stop producing eggs?
Oh, give her a break.
I think she'll be a fab mum.
Have not read all posts (too tired too old)
I am 69 and we have a 14 and 7 year old Social Services did not think DH 66 and I were too old It was not selfishness these children needed a loving home. Am sure Tina will be a good mum
You're post is the one that proves that it doesn't matter what age you are.
It's only how you love them and bring them up.
Oh and I should also say that due to my mother dying, I was bought up by my grandparents, in their late 50s when they took me on as a baby. I could not have had a more loving, stimulating home and I was never embarrassed by their age. To be honest, I never saw the difference between them and my friends 30 something parents (they were all grown ups).
While I don't particularly warm to TM, I wish her luck and think its not for anyone else to judge.
I know of a woman who's just had her first at 52. no idea if it was a donor egg. she is deliriously happy. One child is easy. She'll be ok.
The eggs of an older woman are often defected causing chromosome abnormalities, miscarriages,stillbirth.
The menopause happens for a reason.
Why can we not accept that? Why do people have to push the boundaries?
So what if medically a woman in her seventies can get pregnant? Where do you draw the line?
Where does the priority of the child take place?
"The menopause happens for a reason. "
Nature is generally fairly wise and there's normally a reason why we evolve as we have. Women become infertile and men don't (or less so) - one interpretation of that could be that statistically, mothers matter more in the raising of children than men do. In the stone age it maybe mattered less to your survival if your Dad died than if your Mum died. Not in every case, but averaged out, over the generations. Not very pc I know, but there has to be a reason for the difference, or the same would have happened to men.
I'm an older mum too and it won't matter at all, provided I manage to stay alive. So I wish her well and hope her health stays good and she gets the child through to adulthood, in which case it's all great.
I started my periods around 10, so nature decided that at 10 it was possible for me to get pregnant. So those who are using nature as an argument how would you feel at a 10 year old being pregnant.
"In the stone age ....."
We are not living in the Stone Age now though.
juule the menopause means women stop getting pregnant. Did you do biology at school?
Ok so there's no menopause.
You think it's ok for women to keep having babies?
When do they stop? 50, 60, 70, 80?
You think that's fair on the child?
A friend of mine had a child naturally at 50. It was a bit of a shock for her and her DH after 20 years together and several failed rounds of IVF in her late 30s!
Gosh, they must have been thrilled.
I think the menopause causes a lot of grief for women and I don't accept it!!!
women have a time schedule that men don't have which puts htem at a disadvantage in their careers and in relationships sometimes (depending on their age, stage of relationship etc).
so if we're saying it's "ok" for men to be older fathers is that not really saying that we expect the woman to be there to pick up the slack, no matter how old the dad is, never mind cos poor ol' mum is the one we know will really be raising the child. men can walk away and sometimes do, so if they're old so be it!!!!!? cos that's what it sounds like.
The eggs of an older woman are often defected causing chromosome abnormalities, miscarriages,stillbirth.
The same can be said about the sperm quality of older men - which increases the chances of all of the above as well.
dunno Everlong is it fair when men do it?
My friends mum has her at 51 - naturally - it happens - she was loved
Gawd, good luck to her. I'm forty and I'm fucked.
McNew - I've already raised that point, it was
"juule the menopause means women stop getting pregnant. Did you do biology at school?"
So menopause stops women getting pregnant. Okay.
What's that go to do with the reason for menopause?
I am 27 and my husband is 32 and if something was to happen to us we have plans in place, as well as life insurance so the person who will become DC legal guardian will have the money to support them.
I think as part of being a responsible parent is making plans for when the worst happens.
Jade Goody was young and sadly her boys are without a mum on the flip side there is people living in there 100's.
"those who are using nature as an argument how would you feel at a 10 year old being pregnant."
I would think it was a bad idea for a 10 yr old to be pregnant. It would mean that statutory rape had been committed on a child. At 10, I don't think a child is capable of making a fully informed decision. I believe it would be problematic for the welfare of both of the children - i.e. the mother and the baby.
I don't think anyone is using only nature as an argument against post-menopausal pregnancies - but even if they were, that doesn't mean that there aren't social arguments against pregnancy at the age of 10.
juule why do you keep asking questions which don't seem to make sense? What point are you making? I have no idea.
Is it fair on a child to have a mother who is 18 and overwhelmed? I had my DD at 18 and I was overwhelmed and out of my depth.
I'm extremely lucky to have continued with my studies and now have a career I love and can offer her and my new DS a stable, loving environment.
Quite frankly, I am a better mother at 33 than I was at 18 and I feel sorry that my daughter had to grow up alongside my own growing.
Give me an older mother any day!
how about a 13 year old in spain, where that is the legal age of consent.
Arthur - my hypothetical was based on physiological ability, not moral ability. Nature is a non-argument!
Bowlersarm, Everlong said "The menopause happens for a reason. "
I was curious as to what people think that reason is.
Sorry if I've confused you.
THAT'S who she is! I watched her on This Morning and thought "ee she looks awfully like that women on Shameless, same accent too". So she IS that women from Shamelss
which explains a lot
YABU though, no ones business but theirs.
Juule, Perhaps you could explain why you think women go through the menopause. It might enlighten me.
So if a women goes into menopause in her 20 ( it can happen) should she then not have IVF.
I don't know. But anyway, that's not the discussion here.
Bowlersarm, I have no idea which is why I was interested in other people's thoughts on it.
Of course a woman who has early onset menopause you should be allowed to use science to help her reach motherhood. Anyone who says otherwise is an ass.
I'm always shocked that on a parenting website people will come out and judge what the correct age of 'parents' should be.
It so depresses me that those who've had the family they want will come on here and tell those that are struggling because they are older that they are not worthy of parenthood.
Menopause at 20 is exceptional, unusually premature, an individual circumstance which is different from menopause at the natural age for most women.
Freegle, nature alone is a non-argument, but it's a reasonable point to add to the wider argument.
"YABU though, no ones business but theirs."
which would be fine, but she has chosen to put her personal life up to public scrutiny
Arthur - agreed. And I hope we can also agree that as part of the wider argument, nature intended or was allowing for my body to birth at 9 and McNew at 10?
Nature, does not
thankfully dictate when women should reproduce and thank science for science
"It so depresses me that those who've had the family they want will come on here and tell those that are struggling because they are older that they are not worthy of parenthood."
You and me both, LadyBeagle.
As I wrote above, my DH is over 50 and he is a fantastic dad. His parents were also older when he was born and his father is still going strong (sadly, we lost my MIL earlier this year but she was well into her 80s). I'm considerably younger than my DH, but my genes aren't nearly as good as his! All my grandparents died quite young. And yet some people think my DH shouldn't have any more children due solely to his age. Is a puzzlement, as the King says in The King and I.
Nature was indeed allowing it. I agree. As part of the wider argument we could perhaps also both say that, in that case, the best interests of both mother and child need to come before what either Nature or Science might allow. I would say that they also need to be balanced against each other, but perhaps we differ there?
No one mentions that a 50 year old father is too old because he doesn't have to give birth! I gave birth to PFB ten months ago, at the age of 37. I didn't think I was too old - but it turns out I was, really. The birth went ok, but the recovery was excruciating and is ongoing. DD won't have a sibling, unfortunately. Tina Mallone presumably has plenty of cash, which might make it easier?
Very good and valid point Gail.
It's not really about politics, age or gender, it's about the havoc that being pregnant might wreak on an older body...and that's just the first nine months. I know my pregnancies would have been easier ten years before. Age is the only reason we wouldn't do it again. We all age regardless of wants, needs. Equality etc. I had my first Chile at 35, frankly, I now look every day of my age whereas beforehand people often thought I was in my twenties. Pregnancy is tough on the human body.
Did many women have the menopause in "the olden days" just thinking that if the average lifespan was about 40-45 then surely the majority of women who still be fertile when they died?
Also given no contraception would women have just produced baby after baby with only breastfeeding spacing children so would have spent most of their adult lives without periods?
Is the menopause a relatively new thing? Is it an evolutionary adaption, for example, women who lived longer and had the menopause and therefore weren't bearing their own children could help their children bring up their children so they tended to survive more so were at a better evolutionary advantage given that up until recently 50% of children died before age 5 or something.
Anyway back to TM, good luck to her really.
OP, YABU to judge on her behalf.
YANBU if you choose NOT to embark on a pregnancy when you are 50 .
It would not/will not be my choice, but then again I had 4 boys between 37 and 44 and that is quite enough, thank you very much.
Biology is a bit of a non-argument IMO, for many reasons. There are so many ways in which we manipulate what nature 'intended' (for the record, natrue does not intend anything, but via evolution we veeeery, very slowly devolped the way we did), so why not in this way? And yes, a 50 year old father would not face this amount of scrutiny over his choice to father a child at his age.
There is a theory, that biologically speaking human females should have their babies in their late teens, fathered by an 'older' male @25-30 who would be an experienced hunter and by virtue of still being alive had proven that his gene were good material. Next 15 years are spend with child-rearing, then by the time she's 30 she is a Wise Woman and may take much younger man as a toy boy
to teach him the way of the world ie sex .
That scenario is so NOT what my live panned out like!!
And what sweetkitty said - so true.
Once you're over 35 you are on borrowed time, biologically and naturally spaking
My mum had me at 35 and died when I was 10. My best friend's mum was 44 when she had her and is still alive and well and her dad was 54 and only died last year (we are both 33.) I can't see how in modern terms 50 is hugely different to 40 in terms of general health and life expectancy. Good luck to you kitchen and other 'older mums.' I am not an older mother but am having a baby in less than conventional circumstances. I am happy, confident and content in my decisions.
Oh fuck, I'm gonny just lie down and die...I'm soon to be no use to man nor fucking beast!
Nonono, feegle, you should enjoy the freedom being an Old Crone brings <<toothless smile>>
Pacific - I've just read your first post on this thread. Ummm you're my new guru
wummin crush I think I love you. fancy having a baby
I had ds at 39, normal birth, and no more tired than the average younger mum.
I must live in a different universe where only young perky women are allowed to give birth.
I'm not sure 50 isn't old. I have two friends with older parents and now we are in our 30's one is caring for her mother and her father died and she really feels sad about it. She has older siblings and she was the last shot at parenthood. She doesn't feel like she has a close relationship with her siblings because there is a 17 year ages gap.
The other one doesn't mind so much but she has expressed concern of their ailing health, parents are now in their late 70's. She wouldn't have to be thinking of care homes (they are getting to the stage they will be unable to live by themselves in the next 5 years) and such at this age if her parents weren't so old.
I understand these things may happen to younger parents but it is more common with older ones. I'm not saying either is right or wrong. Both of these friends were very embarrassed at secondary school because quite often their parents got mistaken for their grandparents.
I also know a woman who had triplets at 60 (we were on a fertility board together). I do think that was very irresponsible and unfair to her children.
Personally DH and I had a cut off age of 38, if we hadn't been able to conceive by then we would have stopped trying. I know now many people have babies in their mid/late 40's but we personally didn't feel that would be fair on any future children.
Should read. 'I'm not sure, 50 isn't old imo.'
I was 27 and knackered. I don't think age comes into it much when it comes to recovery.
If anything I'd probably have more stamina/inner resources now I'm in my 40s.
I've just realised a further problem with people banging on about what's best for 'the child'
Firstly we infantilise 'children' into adulthood - so what if your mum dies at 20 ? - they're an adult.
And secondly this is the UK, they'd be fine. It's just so parochial first world when more than half the works probably lose their parents when they're teenagers.
We're just so up our own westernised arses sometimes.
I also don't believe anyone has a 'right' to a child but it certainly doesn't mean being 50 excludes you for age. Women give birth naturally til about 52.
None of my friends who lost parents at twenty thought that was normal, natural or fair. Of course, they were totally up their westernised asses about it all. Would you feel ok if you thought you might die just after your kids left school?
My mother had me at 28 but loved the bottle more than her kids and buggered off when I was 14
14 years of a GOODother would have been smashing ....
Not mad on the woman but I won't judge her choices
' so what if your mum dies at 20 they're an adult '
And besides having a mother whilst you are in your twenties and thirties whilst you are having children, getting support, help off them must be absolutely wonderful I would imagine.
We don't stop becoming a parent when they hit 20!
Shakes head sadly at the pig ignorance of Laurie's comment.
Personally, I would not choose to have a child at 50, and would not like to be the child of a parent (male or female) who had me at 50. I understand that we are all living longer, but I think it's not just about the amount of time we have with our parents, it's about the quality too. Obviously anyone can become unwell at any point, but statistically it is more likely to happen to an older person due to the aging process. Now as an adult I spend time with my mum and dad doing things we enjoy, I am so glad we have this time where neither are having to care for each other to just enjoy our relationships. Due to the fact they had me in their 20's we should hopefully have this time for longer.
I personally do agree that the menopause happens for a reason, to ensure that the human race continues to thrive by having the next generation being looked after by the (statistically speaking) most physically fit mothers. I also think that now society has evolved to the point of monogamous relationships where the father is expected to stay and raise his children, it doesn't make sense for a man to father a child at this age either.
I don't judge anyone for their decisions on this subject, but have made my own because of these points.
Blimey, I've heard it all now. Not wanting your mum to die when you're 20 means you're up your own Westernised arse?
Laurie please come back and say that you didn't mean it that way or something.
What I mean is that all over the world children are losing their parents when they're really young and us worrying about adults losing their parents is another way we have in the West of prolonging childhood.
It's a gift to have your parents in the vast majority of the world past early teenagehood.
Obviously having your parents die is hard at any age (mine are dead) but its not necessarily harder at 20, nor have you done wrong to your child only giving them 20 years.
There's so much judgement of other women's choices on these boards.
Tina whatserface is being criticised for only being able to give her child 20 or 30 years
In the 7 years I've been on here I've seen women criticised for:
Having children too young
Having children too old
Having children while having a job
Having children when not being wealthy
Having children when the baby might be disabled
Having children by choice, alone or using a donor
Not having children
Having too many children
Ffs, enough already.
Any child being brought up in this country and by this woman who has means is automatically a lucky little fucker compared to the vast majority of children living in shite round the world.
Laurie nobody is criticising women for being too young, poor, etc etc in this instance.
Just for being too old. Which is valid.
Won't everyone think of the children.
I wouldn't do it personally but if it's what her and her dh want and they know they can cope financially and emotionally hats off to him.
I don't know if in here position I would have told the world her gastric band has surely got to add a risk of complications.
I would never judge an older mother on her age so I think it's really insulting on this thread that older mothers have been declared the best mothers and mothers in their twenties have been compared to baby ps mum.
Any child being brought up in this country and by this woman who has means is automatically a lucky little fucker compared to the vast majority of children living in shite round the world.
I wouldn't like to be parenting a teenager like ds1 when I was mid 60s, we had some pretty tough years with him.
Someone mentioned premature menopause being exceptionally rare. I have met four women who all had the menopause before 30, including one who was 19. I'm wondering if it's as rare as we think.
Feeling the Sisterhood yet again on here
So anyone aged 50 shame on you for wanting a child. You are selfish and entitled if you weren't able to conceive naturally, eh? And generally you are past it, should stop being an embarrassment, get a blue rinse and hide yourself away. But if you have testicles it's perfectly alright then?
This is not a shame when the child is wanted and loved. I don't 'feel sorry for the kid'. I feel sorry for the kid with the absent drug dealing 21 year old father or the young mum who wants to go out and party all the time and leaves her kids with the grandparents, if we are going to make huge judgements.
hope it goes well for her
my greatgrandma has her last at 47
personally at 40 i feel tired at the thought of it
My sentiments exactly bringback.
No matter the age of a parent, if the child is brought into the world in love and is wanted and cherished, it is a lucky child.
Age doesn't necessarily mean a great parent..be she 18 or 50, lets celebrate great parenting. There are many parents of all ages who are selfish and put the needs of themselves above those of their children.
Those are the parents who should be criticised.
But if the mother dies at 60 and the child is 10 what good is love?
This just feels like a non issue to me. So what? If the child is wanted and loved then all well and good.
As for saying that the mother could drop dead, well, couldn't we all. There's a poster on page 10 making just that point about her own mother (forgive me I can't scroll back and namecheck you).
There's a much higher chance of dying when you're nearer to 60 than you are to 20 fgs.
And if both parents are older and they both die, who do you proposes takes parental control over that child?
People do have the ability to twist words out of context on here, dont they?
My comment in reference to women with disabilities having babies had the added line of with a life limiting condition, i.e. I took this to mean that someone who had a condition that meant they are likely to die prematurely i.e. soon, having a baby. Of course I dont have issue with women with disabilities having babies, I am one fgs. But yes, a younger woman with a condition (and it wouldnt need to be a disability, it could be a terminal illness) which means they dont have long left to live having a baby would be selfish IMO.
And as everlong said, where do we draw the line? So TM is pregnant at 50, is it ok at 60? 70? 80? As long as the woman gets her baby does it really matter? Love isnt everything you know.
I don't quite understand why people can't see that it's a negative thing for a child to have a higher chance of their parents dying/becoming seriously unwell while the child is at a younger than average age? Surely this would be everyone's worst nightmare?! (except of course people with awful abusive parents) What am I missing?
People seem to think that it is anyone's 'right' to have a baby no matter what their circumstances are Heffalump
I find that point of view baffling.
But if they want a child so badly, it is surely because they want to love them and give them the best they possibly could. So surely they would not wish the heartache and trauma of seeing a parent ill/dying at possibly such a young age? At the end of the day its each persons individual choice, but I don't understand it.
If we all lived our lives by what ifs, none of us would get past the front door.
Life is unpredictable for every one of us. It's a gift and should be celebrated.
If, God forbid, I were to die today, I would be leaving behind a 15 yr old and a baby of 23 weeks. Both children are loved and I am blessed to have been fortunate enough to have them but the condition my mother died of, at 52, can be hereditary. If I lived my life thinking I may die as a young woman, my children would not have been born. Certainly not the baby, by all accounts but I love him and he is wanted. I doubt my DP would die at around the same time, so my children would have him, as well as our extended family.
Most people who have children, whatever age they may be, have some kind of family to help, should a parent pass.
Each of the opinions on this thread are valid, as we all have that basic right, and we all, quite rightly, have the power to choose the life we choose, however it's unsettling to hear some posters say that women in their 50's should not be afforded the same rights as younger women. That's what gets the hairs on my neck bristling.
Our lives, our bloody decision.
And if a woman is fit and healthy and takes care of herself at 50 it IS her right.
I'm not sure either heffalump baffles me too.
Selfishness and short sightedness springs to mind though.
Soon we will be able to tell our predisposition for all sorts of illnesses through genetic testing. Some of which we may be able to take action on (like Ms Jolie), some not.
If we take the argument about not having children later in life in case of illness or death as valid, then the logical extension of that would be that every prospective parent (although obviously only the women as apparently, its different for men) should have all available tests and give up on having a family if they get anything but the best risk rating.
I hate the judging of other women's choices so much.
I agree with Feegle's last 2 posts.
But if you were to die young that would be an unusual situation. People dying in their 60s 70s and 80s is 'normal' and much more common. To me its about the increased chance of dying or becoming seriously unwell before the child is old enough to look after themselves that I find worrying. Of course it's each persons decision, but it doesn't mean that others can't have an opinion and make their own decisions based on that opinion.
Feegle I don't think the two points of view will agree over this. Those who think 50 is too old, using donor eggs, will continue to do so. I don't think it's right.
I'm 50. I'm fit, healthy, financially stable. But there is no way I would have the energy to deal with a newborn, toddler and teenager when I'm in my 60's. I may love the baby, possibly live long enough not to be a burden until it's at least in it's 20's, but there is no way I would be a good enough parent for it. It would be a purely selfish act if I were to have a baby at my age now.
Read up on Sue Tollefsen and how she's spoken of her regrets at having a child at 57.
Also if a mother dies in her 20s and 30s she's likely to have a partner to carry on looking after the children. Or maybe siblings. Or even her own parents.
If a mother dies aged 60, leaving a child of 10 and doesn't have a partner who looks after the child? Her 90 year old mother or father?
And lambzig in my first post I made it clear I feel the same way about an older father too, it's on page 10.
Feeble, cross posted.
What I can't understand is how people are so sure they know the right decision that other women should be making.
I wonder if those same people had not been able to have their children at a young age, perhaps through infertility or not meeting anyone, they would just say "oh no, I am too old".
I smiled reading a previous post where the poster said "we had a deadline of age 38 and if we hadn't conceived by then would have stopped trying". DH and I had the same deadline (along with an earlier strong conviction we would never have IVF), until I hit 38 and that deadline seemed silly. (My DC were born at 42 and 45).
Feegle sorry, when will I learn about autocorrect?
Her age is the least of her worries She seems quite unstable
But this is where Feegle's point about life being unpredictable unravels your argument. I was born when my dad was 50 and my mum 32. My dad lived an active life until 6 weeks before his death at 91.
He was the prime force and greatest positive influence in my life.
It's not an attitude driven by outright selfishness, it's more for me a feeling that a lot of good things are possible in life, which I daresay sounds a bit airy fairy for some.
I don't think it unravels the other side of the argument. I think it's simply down to who is willing to take that chance and who isn't. I know statistically speaking if I were to have a child at 50, there is a higher chance of me dying/becoming ill while the child is still young. I'm not personally willing to take that chance.
Goodluck to her is what I say.
She isn't short of cash and is in the best situation she could be in to bring up a child, the child will be loved and want for nothing.
I have no objections to older mums, and age is nothing but a number up to a certain point. I think ivf should be given to women over 57 as they are nearing 60 which is very, very unfair on the child. Obviously if nature has it's way, then that's different as it was natures will and meant to be.
But if they want a child so badly, it is surely because they want to love them and give them the best they possibly could
Nah, doesn't work like that. There are plenty of instances where people do mad things to have a child, but their reasoning isn't always straightforward. I'm thinking of that couple 10-15 years ago who bought the twins from the US and subsequent reports noticed that they weren't tip-top at caring for them before they were removed by social services.
I don't see a problem with having a baby at 50. 50 is comparatively young these days, most people might be knackered but would be able to cope through the baby, toddler, and primary school years. Secondary school might be alright as well, although by that stage many people would be feeling the reduction in mobility, increase in "niggly" health problems, etc.
So once your child gets to uni, they are likely to be faced with at least one parent who has ongoing health problems and all the limitations that imposes. And if they're an only child, they'll be in the position of a sole carer at a very young age when they should be building a career, having fun and seeing the world, or starting their own family. If they're lucky and have an older sibling (like Tina Malone) to share the load they'll still lack a peer with whom to offload to, who'll truly understand their position.
Coupled with all this is the reduction in pension entitlements and benefits that are gradually encroaching. For someone who's fifty now this might be feasible financially , but by the time my generation is that age I think economics will probably play a part in many people not going down this road.
Having said all that, I don't think "shame on you!" for anyone, male or female, making this choice. I just don't think it's a fabulous idea, all things considered.
' the child will be loved and want for nothing '
Apart from it's mother should she die when they are still in childhood, obviously.
The link above talks about life expectancy, not obviously, health. Women (and men) are living well into their 80's, on average.
However, I work in a sector supporting hard to reach and vulnerable groups and was recently at a neighbourhood meeting where I discovered that according to statistics (not that I'm the biggest fan of stats but it serves to prove a point) within one particular borough, there are two smaller areas. Separated by nothing in particular, except that in one area a higher percentage of residents were long-term unemployed and lives in social housing. The other area had a higher percentage of working home-owners and due to this, were expected to live 10 years longer than their counterparts. Obviously, it's not as black and white as all that, there are other factors, but the other factors stem, in the majority, from their housing and employment status.
Bowlers I understand your point and your choice is the right one for you, I just believe that women also have the right to make an alternative choice, one that's right for them.
My whole argument is that who are we, as women, to believe it's right to criticise a woman for exercising her choice?
everlong why do you automatically assume that if an older mother dies, her partner wont be willing/ able to parent their DC? Or that there wont be adequate help and support from family?
Everlong my friend dies at 32 from cancer - she left children behind - shit happens regardless of age
My mum is 68 and off on her own on an 8 week camping trip round Europe - she if very far from infirm or frail and probably will be for a good few years to come
If fear of dying was a reason not to have kids then none of us should! You could be hit by a bus tomorrow
gordy has made a very good point there.
You can die at any age, from anything, no-one knows what is round the corner in the roller coaster we call Life. We all take chances, and they all have risks, but sometimes as individuals we do what is best for us as people and hope for the best.
I don't automatically presume the older woman's partner won't take over if she dies. There is more chance of him not being alive or in good health to care for a child as opposed to if he was 30 years younger.
As regards other family members looking after the child, they are going to be a similar age to the dead mother so might not be able to and tbf why should they?
gordy <as forehead hits desk> yes anyone could be hit by a bus tomorrow. The probability is that they won't.
The chances of dying/ill health are much greater in your 50's/60's than 30's/40's.
Probably why nature made the design for fertility to drop late 40's don't you think?
I am an adoptive parent - I am no stranger to truly shit parenting that has life long implications for children even after that parenting has been terminated.
Being 50 is so far down on my radar screen in the "Shouldn't ever have been a parent" stakes that I can't summon up the enthusiasm for an opinion on whomever this woman is.
As someone that has grown up without a mother from the age of 4 I think I have the right to say how awful it was/is and how hard it was.
Nobody is thinking about the child. Only the mother.
My whole argument is that who are we, as women, to believe it's right to criticise a woman for exercising her choice?
I've got to say, by choosing the career she has and putting herself and her business so much in the public eye TM has invited the public to have opinions on her life and the choices she makes. I thought the whole point of celebrities declaring every part of their lives in the media was to get people to talk about them and increase their celebrity status. That's what we are all doing so I don't feel it's so out of line to give our opinions on her choosing to have a baby at 50.
^gordy has made a very good point there.
You can die at any age, from anything, no-one knows what is round the corner in the roller coaster we call Life. We all take chances, and they all have risks, but sometimes as individuals we do what is best for us as people and hope for the best.^
That anyone can die at any time is not a good point in this particular context, IMO.
As someone who has grown up without a mother since the age of 6 months I think I have the right to say that I was surrounded by loving people, especially aunts and have never had more than a mild curiosity about what might have been.
People have different experiences, what is so hard to understand.
What about younger family members? Who's to say they'll be of a similar age? And as for why should they? I'm not suggesting they should but I certainly would be available to help and support the people I love.
At Bowlers hitting your head. Don't it's not worth the concussion. I agree with gordy, as I've mentioned in previous posts but I do get what you're saying statistically. But life is for living and loving and my beliefs are probably too woo for a lot of people.
Are you healthy, happy, able to provide a loving and stable environment for your DC? No matter what age, these are the questions I'd be asking of myself. If I wasn't up to it, then i'd agree it wouldn't be right or fair to bring a child into the world but that would be my choice and I'd be the one to live with the ensuing consequences of the choice I made.
You were extremely lucky then lamzig that wasn't the care for me. My grandmother was already dead ( she herself died early forties ) and my mums sister was always ill.
My older sisters were of some influence but not particularly great.
tcd - You paint a very gloomy picture of quality of life for people in their late sixties! I'm 56 and have a number of friends in the 60-70ish age bracket and they tend to be very active and fit, quite a few compete in our local half marathon, most are keen cyclists and they sail, go on walkiing holidays etc. Surely if you have a child at 50 and are reasonably affluent you will not be a couch potato with age related health problems in your 60's - goodness, most of us will be working until 66 anway now.
Heffalump - as I've stated, you as well as everyone else have an opinion valid as the next.
This thread hasn't only focused on TM. It's been largely about, for me, supporting women in their choices.
I wholly understand the posters who've said 'it wouldn't be for me' my point is who are we to tell anyone else that it isn't for them or it shouldn't be and find it bizarre that some posters have gone as far as saying older women shouldn't have the same rights on deciding to have a child that is afforded to younger women.
It's that attitude that sticks in my craw, not those of the opinion that it'd be the wrong choice for them, IYSWIM?
I had my last child in at 43. It wasn't a choice I would have made if my circumstances were different, and I put a lot of thought into it. Of course I worry about not being there / fit as DC grow up BUT I stand at the school gates with women 10 years younger than me who are morbidly obese, smoke 20 a day and never exercise. Based on actuarial principles they are probably at least as likely to die before their child grows up as me. No one says you shouldn't have a child in those circumstances. A lot of younger parents also seem to have far less less energy than me. I do think as an older mother it's important to do what you can to mitigate risk (although obviously there's no guarantee - we all know people with exemplary lifestyles that died prematurely) but to say it's selfish and irresponsible is, I think, narrow-minded and not looking at the whole picture.
My first thought on reading this was ''good for her, hope she'll be happy & stay healthy for the child''.
On reading about gordy's mother off on a camping trip round Europe on her own i think that's amazing, i don't have the guts to do that at my age let alone 68. Hope she has fun!
I think it's extremely unfortunate that your personal experiences weren't positive everlong but I think Lamb is a perfect example of how positive family support can be crucial to a child.
I believe positive parenting and the support of extended family is always vital, whether or not a parent dies. It's just not about age for me.
As Kew, quite rightly points out, age is so far down on what makes for a shite parent. It's ridiculous, to me, to say a woman's age should bar her from offering a loving home to a wanted child.
Age itself brings health risks. Cancer, heart disease to name two.
There's no getting away from that.
diplodocus - I couldn't agree more.
She'll have a ball ...its the second time she's done it, she was 65 last time
I think people have an odd idea that 60+ is somehow decrepit and helpless!
I honestly can't decide on this one what I think. But I can't help feeling that as a society we have become used to getting what we want in all aspects of our lives.
I am sorry for what happened to you everlong, it has clearly had a big impact, but its not everyone's experience. I just wanted to highlight it isn't the definitive way things go for everyone who loses a parent at an early age.
That is why, although being an older mother is not for you, that shouldn't mean other women, with different experiences,
Feegle is spot on (and possibly less emotive than me) in her last post.
If you chain smoke and are 5 stone overweight is your cancer risk at 35 lower than a fit, healthy none smoker of 60?
Everlong - of course it does and I'm very aware of it, but so do many other, inter-related factors. I am at risk of developing some forms of cancer and heart disease than a woman 10 years my junior who is morbidly obese and smokes. What I am saying is age isn't the only issue.
gordy - depends on the cancer.
But that's my whole point feegle.
A child doesn't choose what sort of family it's dead mother has does it?
It's pot luck for that child if it's a supportive family or not.
Where does the child come into all this?
Feegle - I completely get what you are saying and the questions I have asked are me trying to understand your side better because we obviously have very different views on this particular subject. I dont feel I have the right to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do, and there is a huge chance that by having the 'play it safe'/'what if' attitude I could be missing out on some amazing experiences in life. But in this case I feel after looking at the facts, that is still the choice I would make.
Perhaps some of us older mothers have made sure there is a back up plan and lots of support, set out our wills and appointed guardians, while perhaps younger mothers think they will live forever. Sweeping generalisation, but so are yours about age.
That's great if you have back up.
tcd - You paint a very gloomy picture of quality of life for people in their late sixties! I'm 56 and have a number of friends in the 60-70ish age bracket and they tend to be very active and fit, quite a few compete in our local half marathon, most are keen cyclists and they sail, go on walkiing holidays etc. Surely if you have a child at 50 and are reasonably affluent you will not be a couch potato with age related health problems in your 60's
On the contrary, I'm saying this as the daughter of two non-smoking, reasonably active people of 54 and 57 who are now on medication for heart conditions. Mum's also dealing with the hot flushes and mood swings associated with the menopause. Dad had a double heart bypass last month and has also been recently diagnosed with asthma. He's on so many tablets I'm surprised he doesn't rattle as he walks! And they are not unusual or particularly sickly amongst their affluent, middle class circle of friends. I can deal with this, I'm an adult and I understand why Daddy was in hospital with drains coming out of his ribs. Would a 7 year old be able to process that?
They're grand now like, but if you press "fast forward" ten or fifteen years down they're not going to be running half marathons. Most 70 year olds wouldn't be, especially ones with teenagers.
Yes, Heff, what you've just said is exactly what I'm asking for people to consider. Your life, your choices. Although, there are many other posters who've very plainly suggested that not everyone (dependant on age) should be afforded the same control over the big choices affecting their lives.
Debate is great though
everlong - no child chooses their family, we can only hope that when people (regardless of age) who are bringing a life into being, accept that they are responsible for considering all of these relative factors and make, or a least discuss in great detail, provision for such an eventuality as their death.
I wouldn't choose them for my parents but it's hard because they obviously want it so badly, how can you say they don't deserve it. I wonder what her reasons are, maybe she is desperatley trying to keep hold of her youth or something or maybe she is having a crisis but they must be sure of their decision and are both obviously happy so I won't go all judgy and will just say good luck to them.
Definitely feegle, I like a good debate! Funnily enough I asked my DH what he thought when he got in from work and he was on the complete opposite side to me! But I am definitely the worrier in the relationship and he is the live in the moment guy!
You could have a baby at 30 and die from a heart attack or a road accident five years later, leaving your child without a parent very young.
You could have a baby at 40 and die at the average age of death 80.
You could have a baby at 50 and live to be 95.
Whatever age you die, your child will still have the support of their other parent, extended immediate family, siblings, friends, partner or work colleagues if older. Everyone dies, older new parents are the norm now, and very rarely are children left totally orphaned.
If you have the energy and finance to support a child, I don't think your age matters.
This however comes from a 44 year old sometimes broody woman with two healthy young children already (4 and 6) whose new partner adamantly doesn't want children because he is too old at 44, so I'm probably not being rational, given my baby making days are now over!
Do people really live their lives according to statistics, excluding all other factors? I once had a pregnancy scare when I was very young, single, and virtually penniless. There are some pretty sobering statistics about the lives of children in poverty and children raised by single parents. But when I was weighing up my options I didn't spend much time agonizing over potential statistical outcomes. Instead I considered my own individual circumstances WRT family support, educational opportunities, employment possibilities, etc. As it turned out I wasn't pregnant after all, so no decisions were necessary (huge sigh of relief for me).
I would imagine that anyone who chooses to have a child later in life goes through a similar process of weighing options based on their own particular and unique circumstances (general health, financial situation, support network, etc.). Bringing a child into the world should not be undertaken lightly for anyone, regardless of age. But relying solely on some generalized abstract numbers without thinking about the individuals involved strikes me as a very limited view.
Christ!! 50 isn't nearly dead!!
I lost two friends in their forties, leaving behind young kids. You don't have a crystal ball, you have no idea what the future holds. There are currently many families relying heavilly on the help of grandparents every day.
People may have a valid point if Tina Malone was 70 and in poor health. I have no idea what she's like as a person and what kind of parent she will be but i happen to not write off other women if they are fifty and over.
Shit happens, irrespective of whether mum is 20 or 50.
Ah. Well, this thread went well
not in places .
As I said above, there is NO arguing with biology.
Our bodies age and work less well and we die.
Wanting a child is always selfish - no child has ever asked to be born. There is nothing wrong with wanting children, and I fail to see how age alone makes a difference?
Yes, the risk of illness/dealth gets higher as we age, so it depends what risk you are prepared to take. And that is a personal decision. My decision for me, and your decision for you. And TM's for her.
I fail to see the need for vitriol.
And much as we are ALL guided by our own experiences, the plural of anecdote does not data make .
Feegle, if you are still there, if I ever, ever considered having another baby, it'd be with you
My mum died at 32 leaving behind a 5yo, 4yo and an 18mnt old. I personally dont agree with having a baby at 50 but if she feels she can cope with it, more power to her
Going public at five weeks?
I was so cautious I didn't announce until after the 20 week scan...
Congratulations to her I say. I think it's brilliant news. xx
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.