‘With science I can have a baby whenever I want’’

[Laughingstock91]

Naomi Campbell had had a baby at 50 - not sure if she’s given birth or it’s a surrogate but her comments really irritated me. She said ‘with science I can have a baby whenever I want’ - do people actually think about the baby? I am sure she’ll be a lovely mum but it makes having a baby just sound like something to tick off on a list when you have decided you have had enough of everything else no matter what age you are. Maybe I am being harsh but if it’s that easy with science, why wait until you are 50?

Aibu?

I think it's lovely that the baby will have a loving home and that is very important. But equally she is 50. There's a high chance that she won't be around for a significant period of her daughters life and if she is, may well burden it if she needs care. Which is very sad for a young person to bare. I was 26 when my dad died and he wasn't even old really. It took me years to get over it.

I know, it's weird how people have already crucified this "woman"
My post was supposed to emphasise woman, not put it in quotes.

call her ugly on the inside if you feel the need to, but she certainly isn't ugly on the outside. You just make yourself look stupid by calling her ugly on the outside.

I know, that was a very stupid comment.

Bridgette Nielsen was 54 when she had a baby using IVF.

Yes I think if I remember correctly she closed the Michael Kors show. I think it was in April.
I see. It seems to be virtual though, so could have been pre-recorded at any time, especially as they featured all 90's supermodels together?

Here's what I don't understand; my friends are going through the adoption process which is insanely thorough, lots of interviews of friends and family, back ground checks, financial records. All of this is to ensure that they are suitable and as far as possible, are capable of looking after a child, and mostly likely a child who may have future long term needs.

But if one goes down the surrogacy route there are zero checks, or at least this is my understanding.

Thanks to science Patricia Rashbrook had a baby at 62.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_Rashbrook

Where do we draw the line?

I why do we have to draw a line at all?

That I shouldn’t be there.

To add to the point, if it’s usually men doing this we just shrug and accept. What’s with the weird internalized misogyny of crucifying a woman for having a child at 50?

So you’d be fine with someone having a baby at 80 then?

So I assume you’re equally horrified by sperm or egg donation and want all forms of Fertility treatment banned unless it involves only the parents and their genetic material? You feel all infertile couples should be denied all other forms of help?"

@Bluntness100

I have no steering feelings about sun donation at all. A child can be raised by its mother without a man and still be a happy well rounded child with a strong ability to form attachments.

Am I against egg donation? Yes, in some countries it's literally advertised as a get rich quick scheme. So poor women are exploited for their fertility. BUT I think the least of all evils in infertility is ivf. . Ivf is often just a helping hand. And ivf with an egg from another woman that is freely given in an altruistic sense I can't really get angry about.

Because that baby will gestate inside the only mother it knows, be atune to her heart, her voice and her movements. It won't have an attachment to the person that donated it as they weren't even alive inside that person. It's a totally different matter to sitting a child from its birth mother simply because you share DNA.

Out of curiosity, if you believe that DNA is so totally important to parenthood, are you against adoption as those people aren't genetic parents? If you found out that the child you had raised for three years had been mixed up with the hospital would you demand an immediate swap? Because At no point have I said parents should only have their own genetic babies .... what I HAVE said is that it's awful to create a genetic baby, get somebody else to grow it so that baby is attached and then break that attachment JUST so you can have a genetic baby. The mother and baby bond should never be intentionally broken unless it's to prevent harm to the child.

She however was definitely not pregnant.
Rewatched the video again. She well could be 7 months pregnant there. She's 178 cm tall, I am same height and I almost didn't show at that term, no one in the office had any idea.

It's not reasonable to take a person's off the cuff remarks about themselves, and critique that person as if they were trying to dictate rules for the rest of us.

Weird right? Someone's asked a question about her life in an interview (I have no idea where, I don't follow her. Just based on a post here) and suddenly she has to think about every woman in the world before answering. Yet the same people are making crass judgements on her, a woman, and declaring what every woman should do by a certain age. Lol

If a woman hears Naomi's (or any celebrity) statement and thinks it applies to her despite not having the same status, she has more things to worry about. I'd kindly ask her to step away from the media, go outside, look around, meet people.

I am against surrogacy as it exploits women and babies and it's not regulated or policed.

Imagine a couple offer you £££££ to have a baby as they want a sibling for their kid. You are on the bones of arse. You go ahead. Half way through the pregnancy you find out that their business is collapsing and they can't pay you. Out they can't afford the baby. They are in a car crash and die. Who gets that baby ?

Because the person that is carrying it is the mother.

why do we have to draw a line at all?
Because of the DC's wellbeing it isn't about what we can do.
50 isn't great with manageable.
62 is horrifying wtf. I'm an active 40 year old with an active 6 year old, imagine being 68 with a 6 year old.

*But manageable.

Had a surprise baby at 45. Really was a surprise had no idea I was pregnant until 5 months. Not a single symptom.

She is lovely but compared to my experience of having babies younger on dear. In my 20s and 30s I had more energy and my body healed from pregnancy so much quicker. I actually feel sorry for her now as a toddler. I am not the same super nanny type mum I was with my other children.

Out of curiosity, if you believe that DNA is so totally important to parenthood, are you against adoption as those people aren't genetic parents

I’m not against any of it on the caveat that all parties agree, everyone is happy, everyone is capable of understanding what they are doing, no one is being exploited. And that the child will be loved and cherished. I make no judgements, as I understand infertility can be crucifying. I fully believe in freedom of choice on the understanding it is choice.

Now of course she may well have adopted but given how prevalent surrogacy has become for celebrities in the past few years

Where are the threads for these celebrities? Let's also speculate on and villify them by calling them "ugly inside and out".

One minute "women are expected to be nice and kind all the time, fck that shit", the next minute "she's a nob and not very nice".

If surrogacy is to continue it needs strong regulation, there should be a process similar to adoption or fostering vetting these new perspective parents.
What's the stop paedophiles buying babies. Far fetched maybe if money can buy anything it's a possibility
I hope I don't get banned for this put money aside, could Naomi Campbell pass the adoption process with her record of violence.

It's not down to anyone to draw a line, especially for others. Draw a line for yourself if you want. I wouldn't want to have a baby at 50 but maybe if I didn't have any children and had wanted them all of my life then I might feel very different about it. Difficult to say.

My MIL had a child in her mid 50s.

From my experience what I can say is that everyone in the family is worried about mil and fil passing away. Their health is okay but not the best.

The thought process for everyone involved is interesting.

She’s very well looked after and very loved which is great. Her older brothers and sisters make a fuss of her.

But Should anything happen to my in laws , me and my partner will end up becoming legal guardians for her because non of my in laws other children (my bils and SILs) have the means or want to take responsibility. Nor does my mil trust them to care for her. I think that simply comes down to me and DH already having kids and owning our own house.

So in reality, my in laws had a child and we’ve been told she will be our responsibility when they’re gone.

Not particularly impressed with in laws about it however when it comes down to it we will get on with it.

I’ve never really discussed it with my partner but should anything happen to my in laws I’ve always planned ahead for one extra person to be part of our family. For example when we bought our house, a third child was taken into account. When we picked our school and thinking about secondary school, I take her into account. Every time I upgrade my car, I’ve taken a third child into account.

It’s not the financial aspect which bothers us so much, that will be handled but to take a whole person into your care because someone wanted a human being for the sake of completing their life and not thinking ahead and then leaving the rest of the family to deal with it is a bit selfish IMO.

I feel sorry for the young girl. She’s very loved. really level headed for someone in primary school however she’s already had the conversation and realisation that mum and dad are old and may not be around for long. That’s a heavy burden on a child. That’s unfair. You can see that she carries that with her and she does say ‘I worry they won’t be around when I’m older’.

I hope I don't get banned for this put money aside, could Naomi Campbell pass the adoption process with her record of violence.

Most ordinary mortals wouldn’t stand a chance of adopting a baby at 50 anyway.

I haven't read the whole thread, but those who criticise older mothers are usually 1. younger and 2. already have a child. Imho it is no less selfish to have a child when you are older as long as you can provide for that child.

Things have moved on in my lifetime and people are no longer old at 60.