Comments on: Should a 72-year-old woman be allowed to have a baby through IVF?

By: Zirbert

Zirbert — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:24:35 +0000

I’m pretty much with dwo (comment # 7) on this one. “Allowed”? Probably, yes. I generally don’t want the government telling anyone whether they can or cannot have children.

However, just because she should be “allowed” to doesn’t make it right. Or intelligent, or even sane. No one with a shred of sense should be willing to help this woman in her ridiculous, selfish quest.

There are lots of things that I don’t think people should do, but that I also don’t think the government should be telling them they aren’t allowed to do.

-Zirbert
http://zirbert.blogspot.com

By: Chris M-G

Chris M-G — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 11:44:56 +0000

Doctors are already being censored- if they can’t refuse certain practices based on religious beliefs, why should they be able to refuse other practices based on conscience?

By: Roxeanne de Luca

Roxeanne de Luca — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 04:55:04 +0000

I’m sure it hurts to know you’ve missed out on your chance to have a baby, but you cannot play God and go back in time to be 25 again.

Cas, that’s the understatement of the week. A woman who is 45 might have missed her chance to have a baby, but she would still be young enough to have a child and might live to see her grandkids.

66, 72… that’s just another story altogether.

Now, with all due respect, I think you are missing the point on the issue of male fertility. Perhaps this is me, as a traditional marriage type, talking here, but, in a monogamous, lifelong marriage, fertile 72-year-old men are a moot point. A man can be 70 and virile, but, once the wife undergoes menopause, the couple has become infertile.

(If you want to go the route of 72-year-old male with a young woman – young enough for her fertility to make up for the age-related decline in his – well, there just aren’t many 25-year-old women who would like to sleep with geriatrics.)

By: dwo

dwo — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 00:21:36 +0000

Selfish? Yep. Medically unsound? Yep. Allowed?! As a thought experiment ,suppose the woman is financially sound and has a good support group around her to help rear the child if the mother should die early on. Is it the governments responsibility to regulate this? I don’t think so. As an ethical thing, she should not have the child. As a legal issue it’s a bit more difficult for this libertarian leaning conservative.

By: mj

mj — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:26:30 +0000

While men in their 70s can father children, increasing age ups the chances of birth defects. Beyond 40 or so, DNA fragmentation becomes problematic.

Biologically, both men and women are less equipped as parents as the years go by. And, yes, there are also some pretty important socio-cultural reasons why there is an optimum season in life for parenting.

By: Melinda P

Melinda P — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:04:35 +0000

How stupid are people? There is a reason that we women can only have children for so many years. There is a reason that God created women to go through menopause, and that’s because you don’t have the energy needed to keep up with young children! I think we need to be careful what we wish for in life. If you wanted children and missed the opportunity, then it’s your own fault.

By: W from MP

W from MP — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:56:41 +0000

I agree that such an act is very selfish. At her age would she qualify to adopt an older child, perhaps from foster care? I tend to suspect that she just wants to experience the first few years of being a mother, thus why something like foster care would not be an appealing idea for her.

We can only hope for doctors with conscience. Then again, I’m sure it won’t be long before the government regulates IVF.

-W
Mostly Politics- http://bill84121.blogspot.com

By: Mat

Mat — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 11:32:42 +0000

I read this story earlier in the day and I was wondering if Cassy would have any thoughts on this. I have my answer

Personally, I think it’s idiotic for a woman to have a kid past menopause, I don’t care how healthy they are. However, do live in the time of the “me’s” so I’m not really all that surprised that this stuff is happening.

On a side note, Cassy, did you read the part where the writer compared this Spanish woman to the Romanian 66 year old who also had kids? Better yet, did you see the comment the Romanian made?

” ‘It is a great sadness when kids are orphans but civil society will help these children,’ she told The AP.”

So essentially, it a-ok to pump out kids when you’re 60+ and then croak because, hey, the rest of us will pick up the tab afterwards. Oh well, I guess it really does take a village to raise kids these days. After all this time, I honestly believed that it took two responsible parents. Silly me, what I was I thinking?

By: ObamaCare Updates on The Patriot Room

ObamaCare Updates on The Patriot Room — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:26:34 +0000

[...] Cassy Fiano: Should a 72-year old Woman be Allowed to have a Baby In-vitro? [...]

By: BobV

BobV — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:59:34 +0000

No, she shouldn’t. IVF isn’t a basic right and I think fertility doctors should have the obligation to refuse treatment in some cases (at the risk of losing their license).

She had ample opportunities to have a kid and didn’t take them. Sorry but like everything else in life there is a time limit here.