Older women giving birth

[AB Asks]

In the news recently we have been hearing a lot about older women giving birth. The oldest woman so far is a 67 year old who had twins thanks to fertility treatment.

Women in general are now having babies when they're older; it can be pinned down to their desire to have a career and a home before having children. But are these women who are having babies in their forties a burden on the NHS?

It is well known the older you are the more trouble you are likely to experience when being pregnant and during birth? Or are these women sensible � waiting until they are completely ready before having children?

[Goodsoulette]

its ridiculous.. not only for medical issues but why would you do that to your children. I just cvant see how it can be sensible having children at that age, she is going to die more than likely by the time they are out of their teens. That surely isnt fair. My Grandad was 52 when my mum was born and he was a healthy old man who died in his 90s but mum says that he still couldnt do things with her that other dads could do and from the age of 65 he just went on about dying soon.

[cyanide]

Selfish or what?

[Pippa68]

There isn't an option for me to tick on 'Have Your Say'.

it is all very well a 60 year old having a baby..but what about a 70 year old raising a 10 year old child? blimey I am only 39 but mine wear me out something silly!

[Pippa68]

Or jump leads..

[kwicky]

To be orphaned before reaching puberty was surely not what the good book intended.

[lector]

Nature should not be interferred with.

Ther are good reasons for having children naturally beteween certain ages for all animals, including humans.

Should the NHS be 'footing' this bill as well - versus the many priorities?

[wolf63]

To have a child naturally at any age is fine with me, if your body is still ready to conceive then so be it.

But most of these women are having treatment to get pregnant - they are thinking only of their needs and are not considering the needs of the child.

I am 43 and after spending Christmas with my brother and wife - I was traumatised. The children (3 years and 10 months) are lovely but they need constant supervision. I was shattered after less than a week.

The NHS is under constant pressure for essential treatments - we need to stop unnecessary treatments.

[dot.hawkes]

I had my first child at 26, nearly four years after getting married, at the anti-natal clinic they immediatly said i was a primo grava or something, because i was having my first child after 25. What is the age for that now? surely it will have been altered now to reflect the career choices women are making.

[Pippa68]

Elderly prima gravida, dot? lol..I know, it's ridiculous isn't it?

I think it has gone up to 30+ now..not sure though!

[B00]

Got to admit,I was made to feel old having Mini Boo at 34 :-(

But as everyone has already stated, there's a reason why nature decides you're too old to have children. I don't think the women who decide to have babies very late in life realise how selfish they are being to the children they have.

[nigella]

NHS guidelines include the criteria that women should be between 23-39 to qualify for up to 3 cycles of IVF, so anyone over this age should be paying themselves, therefore easing the burden on the NHS.

As for late pregnancies, some people may not have the good fortune of a healthy and stable relationship at a younger age and only get that opportunity later in life.

[Trinny]

Some women for some reason or another may not of been able to give birth at a younger age. But with advances of medical breakthroughs are now given the chance to have a child. And many of these women could well be in their 40's and older.

What about the men who become parents at a ripe old age. Does it still count as being trouble?

67 is too old. But a woman in her 40's having a child. No, its not too old. 40 is still young. And I cant see where it would be a burden on the NHS anyway.

[stewey]

Me thingst the stupid old broad just wants to be entered into that Irish book or records. Why , why , why does this nonsensical stupidity happen?!! I would suggest giving her a tubal ligation, remove the somewhat atrophyed ovaries, and suggest to her that she get a new hobby. SICKENING!!

[crete]

hi dot, i think they would have said prima grava, which means pregnant for the first time.

[sarnieken]

Any use of Fertility treatment should be restricted to those unable to have children due to medical reasons and below a certain age that would permit healthy parentage till at least the 18th birthday of the oldest chld.

Just putting off having a baby till you've had your career isn't a valid reason. I realise this will lead to no end of complaints about having to choose but there are people out there who do both.

I personally think that people having children past a certain age is irresponsible, especially in an already overcrowded world. China has a limit on the number of children a household can have. Why not do it with regards the age of the parent?

[maggie01]

Totally selfish. They want it all. A career first and then when they have achieved that, then they think about children. Children need thier parents even when that child is an adult. My parent died when I was in my early forties and I still wish they were still here.

[horselady]

I had my children when I was 21 and 24. I'm 57 now and the mere thought of going through th child rearing bit again fills me with horror. I need a lie-down in a darkened room when my grand-children go home!

[spanner7853]

I'm 35 and been trying to get pregnant for 3 years. I find it all a bit upsetting when there are these older mothers that will probably only live another 20 years being given fertility treatment. These young adults will then be left to fend for themselves. There are plenty of younger people dying to have their first child (yes I know young people can die young too). I think it is incredibly unfair and should be denied the treatment.