To think becoming a first time mother in your 60s is the height of selfishness?

[CounsellorTroi]

www.vogue.co.uk/arts-and-lifestyle/article/julia-peyton-jones

Had a baby alone at 64. She’ll be 80 years old when her daughter is 16. There’s a good chance she’ll be dead by the time the child is 30. She could well die before the child reaches 25. So very selfish.

The bar has changed for the middle aged woman. Back in the day, you hit 50, cut your hair short, wore a headscarf and spent your life in slippers, waiting for grandchildren and death

She’s the same age as me. Neither of us is middle aged, we’re old. Biology told us both at least 15 years ago that we were too old to become new parents.

Given she's cagey about how her child came into the world, I suspect it's a case of wealthy woman doesn't get her affairs in order, so rents a poorer woman's body so she can buy a baby to entertain her in her retirement as long as the nannies and staff do the bulk of the childcare.

On a feminist level I can't support this.

I think it’s supremely selfish and irresponsible. No thought given to the child at all.

Every person with older parents I know of my own generation is very unhappy about it. A friend of mine’s Dad had her at 52. He’s now in his late 80s. She feels so upset to have much less time with him than her peers get with their parents and that she’s having to participate in his elderly care at a stage in her life when she also has very young children. She’s openly said, she wishes her parents weren’t so old

@HermioneKipper

I think it’s supremely selfish and irresponsible. No thought given to the child at all.

Every person with older parents I know of my own generation is very unhappy about it. A friend of mine’s Dad had her at 52. He’s now in his late 80s. She feels so upset to have much less time with him than her peers get with their parents and that she’s having to participate in his elderly care at a stage in her life when she also has very young children. She’s openly said, she wishes her parents weren’t so old

But the thing is, if your friend’s parents weren’t old when they had her, she wouldn’t exist. She doesn’t get to choose life another way.

Neither does the child in this article. Either she exists because of all the money that paid for her, and the donated egg, and the surrogate or whatever, or she doesn’t exist at all.

It brings some incredibly interesting moral dilemmas. However. Most 65yr old women. In fact I’d say 98%. Can’t naturally have children. Which denotes a certain answer as to do we agree with it based off that?

No it’s 100%. I think the oldest mother to conceive naturally was about 56.

Hardly irrelevant. Go to the Relationships forum here and read about all the women who hate their mothers who are alive and well

Its utterly irrelevant, as this was not the choice being made.

Its also bollocks as its argument that rests on ' Look they are doing something EVEN WORSE so its totes fine for me to do this less shitey thing' which is a warped moral philosophy to say the least.

@Flopsie21

I think it's unfair on the child because of the huge generation gap. It depends on how open minded the woman is. It'll be hard for the child with peers.

I disagree. Generation gaps are a wonderful experience for any child. The tragedy of our society is that we've lost that natural link between generations living together.

I was born when my father was 57; he had a lifetime of old friends so I spent my infancy around very much older people AND my mothers younger set. Then after he died my mother, sister and I spent another decade living with her father (my grandfather) , first in his home then he came to live in ours. One way and another I spent my entire youth in a multi generation household . Exposed to a very wide range of viewpoints, social experience and social customs . All my life, I've never regarded age as any barrier at all, always enjoyed the company of much older people, their wisdom, advice, balance. It's been a massive lifetime privilege and advantage.

In the UK, oldest verified natural pregnancy is currently 59.

Yes and she’s said she wouldn’t wish much older parents on anyone either.

If she didn’t exist at all she wouldn’t know about it.

Just because things can be done doesn’t mean they should be.

Surrogacy is another subject I totally disagree with. Rich elderly lady buys the use of the womb of a poor, younger woman to grow and birth her a baby. Which is then ripped from its mother to pass over to an elderly woman. Who’ll mostly use nannies to raise it. Abhorrent.

My mum is about the same age as this lady. And is still working full time plus fit and healthy. There’s no way she could look after a baby full time. She looks after my toddlers one morning a week and can only just about manage.

The poor child in this situation is all I can say

If it were me, if I were that child, I would rather get the chance to exist

I always find this a really odd argument. Souls aren't hanging out waiting for a chance to be born. Or do you think all women should spend their lives doing nothing but procreating to give more not-existing-yet children a chance of life?

That was my reaction too, OP, until I heard Julia interviewed recently. Child is part of a large, involved, family on both sides, with 37 godparents, with zero money worries. Julia herself very intelligent and considered and knows all
the criticisms.

@futureghost

If it were me, if I were that child, I would rather get the chance to exist

I always find this a really odd argument. Souls aren't hanging out waiting for a chance to be born. Or do you think all women should spend their lives doing nothing but procreating to give more not-existing-yet children a chance of life?

Yeah totally agree with you @futureghost this is the argument anti abortion campaigners use too.

It’s really interesting, and even supposing she used a surrogate really not so different to rich people in earlier times adopting an heir or a “ward” to come and live with them and bequeath their belongings to.

True, but very often the illegitimate child of the husband.

@LynetteScavo

I actually think it's more selfish to bring a child into poverty, whatever your age.

I agree. Or, to accidentally produce (or acquire by marriage) an unwanted and unwelcome child who is resented

A story we see on MN every week.

[quote snowqu33n]@Proudboomer Men use younger women’s bodies and eggs to have babies when in their 60s all the time.
It’s good to see lots of opinions on this thread.
There is evidence that women can occasionally ovulate years after menopause and researchers are still learning new things about the menopause. Women are living longer all the time and there is also evidence that women who have their first child in late thirties are much more likely to live to their nineties. In Japan it was proven that elderly women who live close to an elementary school or kindergarten live longer and in better health.

We are the only animal that has a menopause and medical advances mean that we are living longer than ever.
It’s not my business what the woman does in her personal life but she gave the article to Vogue in order to spark this kind of discussion.
It’s really interesting, and even supposing she used a surrogate really not so different to rich people in earlier times adopting an heir or a “ward” to come and live with them and bequeath their belongings to.[/quote]
She didn't give the article to Vogue or The Times, or any of the other media outlets who've interviewed her in the last few days, in order to spark this kind of discussion. She has a book out and this is all being done to generate publicity and increase sales.

And for all those people saying ' Mums can die at any age, its not different!' I think there is a big difference from having a mother who develops cancer, say, in her 50s or 60s and dies, having previously been fit and well all of her life, to watching a 70 year old mother rapidly age and decline over your primary age and teen years years, knowing she will die fairly soon, and having to organise care in your teens or, if you are lucky, early 20s. That's an entirely different situation.

@RowanAlong

That was my reaction too, OP, until I heard Julia interviewed recently. Child is part of a large, involved, family on both sides, with 37 godparents, with zero money worries. Julia herself very intelligent and considered and knows all the criticisms.

Godparents aren’t the same as parents.

I’m sure the child would rather have a younger mother than oodles of cash.

Yes I’m sure she does know all the criticisms. Didn’t care about them or the welfare of the child though did she

What if someone in their thirties has a life-limiting condition? I personally know two people (not a couple) who had children knowingly with their partner in this situation, one a man and one a woman. One has since passed, leaving their kids in the care of the other parent.
In both cases the partner really wanted to go ahead.
There are some very interesting ethics around all this but at the end of the day we shouldn’t get to police people who haven’t committed a crime.

with 37 godparents

Bloody hell - talk about its quality not quantity that matters! That just makes me more suspicious. Children need a small number of stable long term attachments. 37 god parents certainly does not fit that bill and I am suspect of what someone understands about a child's needs if they offer up this as a defence of their situation.

They'll be a good chance she'll be dead by the time her child is 16, not alone 30! Plus dementia and various other ailments that the elderly often suffer with.
It's incredibly selfish for a man or a woman to have a child so late in life. Yes you could die at any time, but its more likely the older you are the sooner you will die....

@Limejuiceandrum

When they die even

Any carefully planned and wanted child, who is well provided for financially and supported emotionally, starts life with an infinite advantage over some unplanned accidental pregnancy by feckless selfish people who don't even have a home let alone a cardboard box for it to sleep in.

There's a significant difference between an "older" parent of fifty, who probably won't be dancing the mazurka at your wedding, but has decent odds of being in good health by the time you reach twenty, and an actually old parent who is highly likely to be dead or incapable by the time you reach 15. Worse things happen than losing your parents while you're in your twenties. Not many worse things happen than losing them when you're twelve.

Personally I wouldn't choose to have a baby in my late forties either because even though the odds are on your side at that age, the risk of death or disability while my child is still in their teens would be too high for me personally to accept. But at this woman's age you move from it being a "risk" to it being the most likely outcome.

Yes very selfish indeed. She’s not thinking about the child’s needs.
Make me very angry actually!
I don’t care what people say, now that I’m close to 50 I can safely say that regardless of how healthy a life you’ve led, by a certain age your energy levels decrease, your body changes you have less years left (fully compis mentis) on this earth.

@futureghost

And for all those people saying ' Mums can die at any age, its not different!' I think there is a big difference from having a mother who develops cancer, say, in her 50s or 60s and dies, having previously been fit and well all of her life, to watching a 70 year old mother rapidly age and decline over your primary age and teen years years, knowing she will die fairly soon, and having to organise care in your teens or, if you are lucky, early 20s. That's an entirely different situation.

I think you are missing the point of this and my posts.

They are lost on you .

And many women of 70 do not decline rapidly.

I know 85 and 90 year olds who have more energy than some women of 50.

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g
We aren’t mind readers so we can’t say for sure what her motivation is.
In any case, many people have children for non-altruistic reasons, don’t they? To get married, stay married, get child support and keep a house, prevent a partner leaving etc. etc.