Diane Blood second pregnancy - right or wrong?

[jodee]

A.N. Wilson in tonight's Evening Standard commented that Diane Blood should 'Get a life, not a second baby'; ie he finds it ghoulish that she should be pregnant by her dead husband of 6 years and rather should be having a baby with a new partner. Another possible ethical can of worms being opened here, but what do you think?

The first baby I could understand, but not a second.

I think it's difficult to judge, we are not in her situation. She may not have a new partner and I don't think she is all that young so if she wanted a sibling for her son this is one way of getting it !
I hear that her parents-in-law are thrilled as well.
She said on C4 that there were about 30 to 40 mums like her in the UK (who have babies from dead husbands), the only reason she is famous is that because her husband didn't have time to sign a consent form (he was in a coma), she had to go to court.

wrong. All too often, too much weight is given to the "me, me, me" bit of the equation before deciding to start a family. part of recovering from a bereavement is to start looking ahead, not backwards.

A N Wilson is the ghoul, IMHO, Jodee. I really despise him - failed novelist, bigot, misogynist libertarian of the worst sort. I don't know why I read his columns...
For all we know, the decision may have been a really pragmatic, clear-eyed one, not one borne out of overwhelming grief six years down the line. She very probably does "have a life", but not necessarily a partner at the moment.
I always find it hard to criticise a parent, whatever their apparent circumstances, who really wants a child and is determined to give it the very best start in life. Too many kids don't get that. I was just reading the other day that the little chap abandoned in Portugal by his parents has had his cleft lip surgery. Apparently neither of them has contacted Charlie's orphanage since the story broke. I think A N Wilson could find fitter targets for his scorn, to be honest.

Does anyone know if she has a new partner already? I assume not, but if so, I wonder how he feels about this pregnancy? This would concern me.

Having said that, I think it's totally understandable to want a sibling for your first born. If Diane continues to feel that she only wants children by her first husband, then so be it. She's suffered enough.

Marina, thanks for filling me in on Mr Wilson. He always struck me as a very bitter, uncharitable sort of person myself.
I can quite understand her wanting her son to have a sibling and it's a shame that her firstborn's birth certificate has "unknown" written in the space where his father's name should be (I think there was a similar case recently and the Registrar was sympathetic and let the mother put the dead father's name down).

I'm with Bundle on this one. Her attitude was Me, ME, Me. Howabout her children. How weird would it be to grow up without a real father, but with the ghost of this 'perfect' man, always looking down on them. Its easy to understand why she wants a second child as a sibling for the first, but she shouldn't have had the first. How can she ever move on. She's not old,the clock wasn't ticking - its got to be unhealthy to spend your life thinking, he was the only man ever, and not move on. How screwed up do you think her kids are going to be?

I don't think its up to anyone but Diane Blood to decide whether or not Diane Blood should 'get a life' or move on to another partner. Although on the surface her choice might seem a little odd, who's to say what we would do in that position (god forfend).

Logically, there doesn't seem much difference between doing it once and doing it six times if she can and wants to!

Also it might help her existing child to feel less isolated in the long term.

If children grow up knowing they are loved and were dearly wanted I don't see the problem. I know a lot of children scarred badly by a non loving parent or two. Like Marina I feel there are many worse parents around.

No disrespect meant to her here, but, come one it's six years and she is still living in the shadow of her husband, yes having a child, but to have another. I agree with Bundle on this one, as for giving her child a sibling, oh come on, I was an only child and never yearned for a brother or sister, and certainly didn't feel left out of anything.

Just wanted to say that I totally agree with Enid.
Its Diane bloods decision and no one elses.
I say good luck to her!

Lil, I don't understand why you think her kids are going to be screwed up?
Loads of people grow up perfectly well without fathers and many of those fathers die before there children are born.
She comes across as a loving mother and she has as good a chance as any of us of raising healthy happy children.
The only problem I can see for her children are if small minded people single them out or bully them.

I kind of agreed with AN Wilson actually,though I don't really have a problem with Diane Blood using her husband's sperm to produce babies after his death.It's up to her isn't it - though she must live with the consequences- fatherless children for example - and the fact that she might not start to live her own life apart from her husband.

Is it really any different to having an IVF baby, at least Diane Blood knows where the sperm has come from. Single women do have babies by IVF, so do homosexual couples and all sorts of people in 'unusual' relationships.

I don't want to make a moral judgement, I wouldn't do it, as I would never have considered IVF - but that is just my personal decision.

I do agree that it is ridiculous not to allow her husband's name on the birth certificate.