Elizabeth Adeney the 66yr old having a baby. The Sun Telegraph want to know what Mumsnetters think

Such as? Just curious.

great number of smaller insignificant reasons that bundled together make it not such a great idea.

"I think that nature prevents us having children at a more advanced year for a reason."

But what reason would that be?

I think 45 would be a good cut off, as it can and does happen naturally at that age. Maybe the age limit could be pushed up a bit if the woman was living a very healthy lifestyle (as a kind of reward or acknowledgement of her life expectancy!).

The likelihood of a 45 yr old seeing her baby's 21st birthday is (barring accident) high.

The same can NOT be said for a 66 yr old.

My Mum come to think of it was 66 in March and it would be so funny to think of her having a baby!! She can't cope with a 7 yr old and a 3 yr old for very long. (although she is sensible enough not to want to try for toooo long)

I think that nature prevents us having children at a more advanced year for a reason.
if she were able to fall pregnant herslef then it would be no ones business but hers. but i do thin it is a very selfish act to try and concieve at such an age.

that doesn't mean she will not love this child like any other mother nor will it mean she is incapable of parenting adequately.

Leningrad, absolutely.

BALD and Early, just to put the record straight, I used that phrase because it is one often used in discussions about late parenting.

Fyi, I take ds swimming, cycling, walking, and yes, even bowling. And have kicked a ball around with him on plenty of occasions. He also goes to cubs and football club.

if however I had not done that, it would not actually make me a bad parent. It would simply mean I parented differently to those people who do a lot of physical activities with their children, one of the arguments, as I say above, against older parenting.

Agree with Leningrad's posts, too.

There are no gurantees that you will live to see your DCs growing up. However, people very rarely reach a grand old age and then drop down dead. It is a gradual decline. The likelihood of developing Alzheimer?s doubles about every five years after age 65. After age 85, the risk reaches nearly 50 percent. I don't think she has been fair on her baby.

I agree with worldsworstmummy and dizietsma.
Particularly this post of dizietsma's.

"Men can have babies pretty much all their lives, if the technology is there to enable it then why shouldn't women get to do the same thing? Seems pretty sexist to suggest otherwise IMO.

I personally wouldn't want to do it, but who am I to dictate how other people live their lives."

As for funding by the NHS then each case should be assessed individually. No doubt some restrictions would have to be in place as it would be impossible to give unlimited treatment to everyone who asked. But I don't think one of those restrictions should be based on age alone.

If a woman or couple could afford it themselves then that should be be able to make the choice for themselves after taking into account any medical recommendations.

no, i agree. that is why it is so difficult. i thikn i am thinking aloud really..

To be honest FBG, I'm not sure! there were several, so apologies if I seem undirected. I hope I have addressed the points though.

Society does self-regulate, and I think the instances of women of 66 becoming parents are so rare, that is why we all know about it.

But I don't see how in a liberatarian society we can legislate for this, only for the allocation of societies resources. If she can afford it, well, we might disapprove for all sorts of reasons that are meaningful to us, but it is her choice. And I stand behind a woman's right to parenthood even if I disapprove of it - and there are many many people out there that I think should not be parents, but not actually because of their age.

I was just about to write pretty much what BCNS has just said.

it is an interesting point lenin, but just because the parents can pay for the IVF, birth etc privately does that detract from other issues? what if there are massive problems post birth due to her age? the NHS will surely have to pick up the pieces

i honestly don;t know what i think, but i don;t think i can make up my mind either way yet

i do think it is a slippery slope saying who can and can't have children, but i do really thikn 66 is too old to have your first child.

another one who would say up to menopause age. IMO nature does this for a reason.

yes big diff to late 40s and 66 I agree.

I think 50 is about as old as any woman should be. I am 45 and would love another baby, but I'm single so the likelyhood of another in the next couple of years is slim to say the least.
If I met the love of my life tomorrow, I'd want to see how we went for a couple of years, so I'd have to be 48 and that would have to be with so much luck in early conception...so, I'd realy have to say 50 wouldn't I.

I do think 66 is daft and can't imagine my own 67/68 year old mother having a baby at her age.

I do think it's very selfish tbh. Just because you have the money to fund IVF doesn't guarantee you'll live long enough to see your child into the school gates.

And was it my post you were getting het up about?

Reading your last post I can't see a reason not to try that wouldn't bring a benefit over a negative for your reasons tbh. And I mean that in a nice way.

I think Lulu covers the points I agree with most succinctly.

Early, please stop baiting me, its just silly.

Hi FBG. No, I don't think I will. Because amazingly enough, I do kind of agree that its much harder all round, and would be unfair on my ds.

But its a terrific sadness that having found lurve finally I will never know the joy of having a baby with a man l loved. I could make that choice, but for all of us its not right.

But thats about my particular circumstances. If I were rich, could afford all the help (thinks ironing, cleaning, going to work etc) then I would be very tempted.

Also the risk of foetal abnormality plays on my mind, having lived through the tragedy of that with a sibling. But I beleive most IVF for much older women usually involve eggs of much younger women, so a moot point of the IVF slant.