what do you think?

[hiddenwisdom]

The oldest mother ever recorded was a 67 year old woman in Bucharest, Romania a year or two ago. This was through artificial insemination (if you see her picture, you'll know why), but the thing was that it was very controversial..

What do you think? Should a woman who's 67 be allowed to be a mother if she wants to?

Comments

[xxchasingxamyxx]

hell no - in ten years she wont barely know WHO she is, let alone who her kid is. and how can someone of that age (even in tip top health) take care of a little one.

in my personal opinions, once you hit 35-40, your time to bear children has hit the end of the line.

[hiddenwisdom]

you think you can explain it to someone who says "my body, my choice?"

[xxchasingxamyxx]

its not my job to explain it. its just my opinion. i personally want to be able to keep up with my kid(s). I think having a 20 year old when youre sixty is a bit ridiculous. let alone a 12 year old little brother or sister to the college kid.

and the last time i heard my body my choice was for abortion, which is a completely different subject all together

[hiddenwisdom]

I know, but the underlying idea is that the will and desires of the mother outweighs the well-being of the child..

[mamygirl]

If we're allowed to choose whether or not to kill our embryos, you'd think we should be allowed to bring children in to the world when we want to.

The question would be whether or not she's a good mother, not whether or not she should be allowed to conceive. If I were a CPS agent, I might keep more careful watch on her, just to be sure she was capable of caring for the child. :)

[hiddenwisdom]

but you know the outlook isn't that bright about 10 years from now.. ok, so she allowed to conceive if she wants to, but does anyone care that the child will be an orphan a few years from now?

[mamygirl]

That's a good point. I don't know what the solution for that is, but I'm sure a woman who gets pregnant at that age would have thought of that. Or that'd be the hope.

I'm very rarely for putting more restrictions on people. Not in many cases, and not in this one.

[hiddenwisdom]

I would not put a restriction on her either, but I would try to talk sense into her instead of saying "it's your choice"

[southsydesue]

That's screwed up. I mean, you're taking a risk even at 40 bearing children. Not only the well-being/health of your child, but yourself.

Then again, a healthy 20-something could suffer throughout pregnancy, giving birth as well as the child.

Their loss.

[hiddenwisdom]

well.. the child is already born, and I think just turned one year old recently.. so the mother is fine and the baby is fine.. in that case you'd say it was successful and everything is ok?

[southsydesue]

I'm saying it is MY OPINION she not be able to GET pregnant in the first place. Although the child was born with all of it's buttons and bows, still, the risk she took could have resulted in retardation, deformity, etc. of the child.

[southsydesue]

Wait.. Scratch that.

Most women are unable to get pregnant at 67. And if they by chance CAN, any SANE woman would have decided it wise not to bear this child due to the risks involved.

[skipperja]

I would recommend against it, but I guess I wouldn't constrain her to prevent it.

[hiddenwisdom]

you're playing the fine line of what we, as a society, can or should impose on others.. and you're right, we can only recommend, but not forbid.. I would do exactly the same, except if I was the doctor, in which case I would refuse to do the procedure..

[skipperja]

Yes, you'd think a doctor would refuse, but I'll bet many are eager to give it a try just to prove it can be done.

[hiddenwisdom]

it's the sign of human life being devalued..