Gordon Ramsay new baby

[Weridmouse]

Congratulations . Well done Tana.

Interesting thread. I doubt that any ordinary women her age who still (?) want a baby feel ''oh this gives me hope!''. I'd say that by 49, the vast majority of women who would have longed for a child in their early to mid forties have moved through that grief by 49. Also, they'd know that Tana has more money, already had eggs frozen, has been pregnant and delivered already (so chances are higher). It's not something that a normal woman is going to read and think ''oh this is good news for me''.

Anyway, good luck to them, wouldn't want to go back to the drawing board again at 49 but as she already has a 4 year old and tons of money for babysitters, plus older siblings who might be too young for their own families but mature enough to adore baby brothers I think they will all be fine

I hope I do, I am writing a policy on assisted conception and surrogacy at work.

For various reasons adoption isn't an option for me. If it was I would pursue it. People who trot out that line obviously know nothing about either adoption or donor conception.

However adoption and egg donation are completely different, and donor conception is not a "half way house." I will be my child's biological parent, just not their genetic parent.

Your ignorance is breathtaking. If you are going to bother to comment, at least do 2 minutes of basic research first.

Suggesting that it is as simple as " happy and loved" makes me think you actually don't know much about it.

A lot of people on the thread saying ''I'm still ovulating!'' or ''I still get periods at 54''. That doesn't mean that the egg would have been of the quality to result in a viable pregnancy (obviously). Well, I say obviously, but it seems obvious to me.
I had a scan at 49 and they said to me ''oh you've just ovulated!'' I know though that people lose pregnancies about 5 years earlier because of the quality of the egg. Sorry to be real.

Yet you didn't have any idea of the basic statistics regarding successful outcomes?

@PP82 with respect as I gather your intended mode of reproduction is to use a donor egg, you will be quite biased in one direction on this.

The ethics surrounding donor eggs are complex and will continue to change.

On the one side it helps someone to have a longed for child and obviously that child will be very loved.

But it does have similar issues to adoption in that the child may feel they don’t fit in either with their family or peers, there may be heritable diseases and so forth that they have no knowledge of and so on.

And there is the added factor that you come in at the point of conception deciding to place them in this position which may breed resentment.

Having had children the idea that at 18 they may reject me and seek affinity with another family elsewhere would be heartbreaking.

I don’t think there’s any way that this will dissuade you from your chosen plan, nor would I want to.

But I do think it’s important to be realistic about the added layer of issues this route adds to child rearing and family cohesion, which is already tough enough to do and maintain.

Given this is their 6th child and how old their eldest are, you have to assume they know what it’s like to raise a baby to adulthood. To me, this looks like a couple who love being parents and who want that period of intensive parenthood to last as long as possible. I know that I look at my children as they grow, wonder at how fast time is flying, and regularly yearn for those years when they’re so funny and cute and cuddly and innocent and want/need you and only you.

Mind you, not enough to do it again!!

All these people are very positive about donor conception, apart from one whose issues are as a result of donor anonymity and not being told until later in life.

I've read the research about the importance of open donation and earlh disclosure, and am factoring that in when making my plans.

@PP82 I am qualified with background in developmental biology and child psychology…

I also have an interest in epigenetics which is where the majority of my info on donor conception would focus. FYI if you carry a donor egg you will influence gene expression in the developing baby.

Please don’t be so dismissive of others. Especially whenever they have not said that your way forward is wrong.

It just wouldn’t be for me or any potential children I would parent from a biological or psychological standpoint.

But you do you, preferably without insulting others.

I have researched all this, and made my plans accordingly. Egg donors are very comprehensively screened, and my child will have access to information about the donor.

I certainly would not consider them wanting to get in touch with the donor to be rejecting me. What an odd way to view it. Just because they make contact doesn't lessen my bond with my child, or mean that the donor is suddenly their mother.

I think maybe you don't understand donor conception very well.

They lost a son seven years ago so despite having had Oscar subsequently, perhaps they felt their family wasn't complete yet or wanted a younger sibling for Oscar. They can afford it. Fair play to them.

@PP82 Again, please do not be patronising.

I realise you have a lot invested in this, dearly want a child and this is probably the only viable route for you.

So you are going to be biased towards it and highly defensive if anyone presents any information to the contrary.

Whenever you have a child genetically and biologically yours they are yours, no matter if you have a good or bad day, they are stuck with you.

Whenever you adopt or use donor oocytes/sperm, there is always the risk that later on the child wishes to reach out with their family of origin to bond with them leading to disintegration of the original relationship with you as the birth mother. Not to mention them going through the teen years where identity becomes paramount with an unusual set up.

Overall I would feel too much pressure from all of this, which is why I wouldn’t want to do it but if you can that is great.

To say it is all roses is to be incredibly naive, but at least you will know what one of the headline issues will be for your child from the beginning. Most of us just find that out as we go along!

I'm aware of epigenetics too, although my understanding is that the influence can be overstated on some sites promoting egg donation. Genetics is not important to me. One frustrating thing is that if you ever discuss plans for donor egg treatment on mumsnet, people respond assuming you haven't thought about it at all. That you are unaware of costs, success rates, potential complications. No one goes into this without researching it extensively, yet everyone assumes you haven't given it a second thought.

You seemed to think that adoption and donor egg treatment would be equally feasible for anyone, that the reasons for pursuing one over the other would be silly and trivial, and that donor conception is a 'half way house ' between genetic parenthood and adoption. All of these things are way off the mark and are what caused offence.

Exactly. It shocking that people go through life thinking as long as they have periods, nevermind they might be 45+, they can conceive a child naturally. It might happen for the odd woman (just so happens that both my DM and MIL had their last child around this age without assistance), but it would be impossible for the vast majority of us.

I've had so many friends who left getting pregnant until they were pushing 40 and are shocked when it doesn't happen and they have to undergo fertility treatments (and unfortunately it still hasn't happened for some). We really aren't educated about our fertility the way we should be.

Again, you are talking about family of origin without understanding the difference between adoption and donor conception.

I would also add that many, many people are raised by their genetic parents, have poor relationships with them and end up estranged. Many people are closer to step parents, extended family or other parental figures than they are to their genetic parents.

Creating your family in the conventional way is no guarantee of anything.

My work is around the legalities and procedures after a baby is born up to the age of 25. For example surrogate pregnancies where conception is abroad but birth is in the UK. The law has not kept up with reproductive technologies and argually reproductive technologies are not taking pyschological and genetic theory into account sufficiently. TBH it's a legal, moral and ethical nightmare.

Sorry arguably.

Surrogacy and egg donation are very different though.

I don't live in the UK and will not be having treatment there. My view is that the UK has always had quite a negative and backward approach to reproductive technology, which is why the clinics are not as good as in other countries and so many travel abroad for treatment. But as I've left those isles never to return, how they do things is of little concern to me.

Does your work touch at all on donor conception, rather than surrogacy, and if so what are the issues that arise?

IMO it's 2 sides of the same coin.
As genetic parents can apply for a " parental order" and attain parental responsibility, there is no legal basis for preventing that, so a child could feasibly end up with three people people with PR as could a child born to a surrogate. Within UK law there is no legally binding disclaimer.

Quite aside from this and the potentially explosive identity issues ( I agree BTW, this is much less likely if open from the start) I think there is something slightly morally suspect in using a younger and probrably poorer woman's eggs to become a mother.

Serena Joy anyone ?

@PP82 My experience of epigenetics was to learn about it over a series of lectures and to need to research it for some projects for background purposes. Haven’t gone near private fertility clinics, though I can imagine they will push this angle to reel people in.

Your perception that I or anyone else thinks you’ve given little thought to this is flawed. Of course you will have researched. But your viewpoint, no matter the amount of research, will always be biased due to your ultimate aim and how much is at stake for you should you concede to any negative points.

There will be people reading this thread who will be influenced by the rose tinted glasses viewpoint. And I always think it is better to have a more balanced discussion.

It is wonderful that donor gametes are available. But it can be more complex than adoption or children conceived naturally, in so many respects.

Of course adoption may not be feasible for some due to their age, health, wealth, family set up, though I’ve known two single women in their forties to adopt. And of course there are pros and cons for it, as there are for donor assisted conception.

I don’t think any of the reasons I mentioned are silly or trivial - some want donor gametes because they genuinely want to have a pregnancy (my scoffing is more to do with having gone through the experience I can’t imagine why it and childbirth would be so coveted), some men will insist they be the biological father, then you have same sex relationships, single people, people with recurrent miscarriages and other medical difficulties, some who don’t want to adopt because of potential issues with adoptive children who may have had an adverse start to life and/or additional needs etc etc

All of these are valid reasons. But ultimately they all come about because of the circumstances of the person having the baby, even though the potential negative consequences of donor donation will largely be felt by the resultant child.

I would stand by my half way house comment, because in essence you are adopting someone else’s genetic information for the child you will grow and birth. It is to my mind between natural parenthood and adoption, you come in earlier in the process. That is the way I see it, but others will take a different viewpoint and that is fine.

I do understand other peoples perspectives, particularly when they differ to yours and you are vulnerable, may grate against you. But please don’t take offence.

I’ve sat in a lecture theatre watching someone from my cohort (who already had a child), state during a presentation that they didn’t think anyone with fertility issues should have access to NHS treatment because it was a waste of resources and contrary to evolution 🤯 now that’s offensive and reduced me to tears.

I’ve been where you have, had fertility issues and it’s so difficult. It doesn’t matter what me or anyone else thinks personally. If it is the right route for you go for it.

It isn’t for anyone else to judge, just like it isn’t for anyone to judge Tana and Gordon and whatever their backstory is. None of our business.

With regard to the former, I'm not sure there's any precedent for that in the UK? The biological mother (the one who has given birth) is always the legal mother. Same in every country I believe. There's lots of situations where more than two people could have parental responsibility anyway, not sure I see the problem.

The second point is one I've argued extensively in other threads. I'm confident that in European countries the appropriate safeguards are in place to ensure that the donor is happy with their choice and safe. I'm not wealthy myself, and am using the little money I have to pursue this. The donor will be younger, but not necessarily poorer, and I find the Handmaid's Tale comparison ludicrous.

I understand that some may disapprove of the very concept, but they seem to exist far more on mumsnet than in real life. Everyone I've met in the real world just shrugs and says 'you can always use donor eggs' if infertility comes up. Surrogacy is more controversial, and illegal where I live, but opposition to donor conception is quite a niche view I think.

I'm not necessarily against the use of donor eggs in every situation, but it is not a panacea. The UK donors cannot be paid, but UK clinics are using eggs harvested elsewhere, to suggest that there is assurance these women are not being exploited is a reach to put it mildly.

It's not like sperm donation, egg collection in and of itself carries not insignificant risks including possible increased risk of cancer. Alturistic donation by women undergoing fertility treatment ( or in lieu of payment) is one thing. Paying women for their gammetes is something else.