This news story caught my eye this morning

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090517/tuk-age-irrelevant-says-mum-to-be66-6323e80.html

A 66year old woman is set to become Britains oldest mum.

Now I would like to think that im quite an open-minded person, and I think IVF is a wonderful thing as I know of many childless women who have been given the gift of children because of it, but at 66? I think that's just wrong. I dont know what that woman's family setup is but I worry that that child will be left on it's own at a very young age.  I know realistically this can happen no matter what the mothers age, but in this incidence it's a certainty. Either that or the child will be left to care for a very elderly parent at a very young age.

I personally think this woman is selfish, and although I do sympathise with the fact she has never had children, there are surely better ways for someone of her age to pour love on children, if indeed that is her reason for doing this. (Im thinking maybe volunteering in community groups)

Is there an aspect of this I'm not seeing????Does anyone think this is ok?

Eve, Rory & little Boon

 Mummy to my wee roar bear, Rory :D My little man :)

Make a pregnancy ticker

I don't think there is anything you're not seeing Eve and I completely agree with you.

There is a reason that our bodies don't allow us to have children after a certain age. I agree that IVF is a wonderful thing but for people that have genuine fertility problems not because they are too old to conceive! I think the woman is completely selfish and has not thought about the effects of having a mother that old will have on the child. They will probably spend alot of their teenage and early twenties looking after their elderly parent.

Also, it is tiring being in your twenties and having a young baby to look after or a toddler to run around after. Imagine what it would be like at 66?

Bec xx

Hi girls!

I completely agree with both of you. Of course its easy for those of us who have children to make comments and judgements and I can't imagine how difficult it must be to have an overwhelming desire for a child and not be able to have one. But I feel that Nature didn't allow us to have babies past a certain age for a reason.

I worry about the child in this position - the worry and responsibilty of a very old parent at such a young age.......This woman clearly has a lot to offer a child though - I just wonder why she didn't instead opt for either fostering or adopting an older child.

I'm with you all the way on this one Eve!  I saw that story yesterday and was considering posting it but you beat me to it!

I also think IVF is a great thing to have and have a dear friend who was able to have her DD through IVF.  However, I feel there is only so much we should help nature and as has already been pointed out, there is a reason why we can only naturally have babies for so long.  I think that is the real issue here, her age, not the IVF.

I just think it an extremely selfish thing to do as this woman could die before her child becomes independent and have no family around him/her which I think is just an awful thing to do.

Just because she is rich should not mean she should have had this treatment.  The story troubled me!

Selfish, selfish woman!

[Glitterfy.com - *Glitter Words*]

I confess that i am the odd one out here.

I would have loved to have another child (my only child died in infancy).

So I can well understand what drove this woman to have a child.

When you have a child the everyday pressures mean that the idealised 'life with a cute little baby' come down to earth with a bump after a few weeks of sleepless nights.

But unless you have been there I know from experience that the desire to have a child is all consuming and can dominate your thoughts day in day out.

Many men become fathers at this ripe old age and no one questions that.No one calls them selfish.

Levi