To think this is just not acceptable (NHS related)

I do know a woman 50 + who had an IVF baby. It was her 2nd marriage & she had AC. Her new DH was younger & childless. His parents helped to fund IVF. Lovely parents & baby will be adored and well cared for. Still think she was crazy!

endre re births to women over 50 the facts are 55 women over 50 gave birth in 2001 and 238 in 216. The vast majority used IVF ( the majority using donor eggs). So it’s very rare to give narurally over the age of 50. Why do you cal her a ‘poor woman’.? Everything she did was a choice including the number of embryos transferred - and she had 4 babies btw to add to her existing 3 grown up children.

Just imagining the Terrible Twos and Thunderous Threes times Four and you can't hand them back at the end of the day because they're yours

I meant I CAN’T

I can imagine anything worse.
Toddler groups etc. At 50?. It was bad enough taking one GC.
As far as costing the NHS a shed load of £’s, well it will, however think of the money they’ll save us in the end when they have the luxury of having 7 unpaid carers to look after them in their dotage.

River walk, at least smokers and drinkers pay massive amounts in taxes to help pay for their medical care. I speak as a non smoker btw.
Monica, I agree that overpopulation is the major cause of all environmental problems, personally I think it's time to rethink the whole issue of IVF. Infertility is nature's way of population control in my opinion, we should be looking at ways of reducing not increasing it.
Ido feel for genuinely childless couples, but there are still lots of children awaiting adoption.
I know my views will be seen as cold selfish and heartless, after all I have three children from two marriages, but that's still just one for me and one each for my ex husbands and none of us will have any more.
We need to alter our thinking and stop badgering every newly married couple on when they're going to reproduce too.

I do think the tone of some of these posts is unnecessarily belligerent. I get all tense just reading them. Does anyone agree with me or am I a " snowflake"?

Oh, heavens! My reaction to seeing the headline (yes, in the Sun but on the counter at my local shop) was horror. I found looking after 2 young children when I was 26 hard enough. 4 at 50? Nightmare!
Incidentally, the two young children are now delightful adults with charming and bright children of their own.

annep I absolutely agree with you

Well I think the point was that the NHS didn't fund her treatment as they have a limited budget and have to prioritise. So she goes elsewhere, has the treatment and comes back to put pressure on the NHS anyway. Clever move but, I think unfair. And yes others may be unfair too eg smoking. And yes she might have longed for more babies. But that wasn't the point..... I'm off too.

I think the time has come for me to step away from this site.I really have nothing in common with many of you .

So its OK for some to have SECOND families with second husbands but not for a woman to have more children with her husband ..how do you work that out Nannan2 your SECOND attempt at motherhood is more important than hers Terribull I can assure you I dont "froth" I just dont like small minded.mean minded people who can never see others opinions .Theres a lot of them on this site.Just because THEY wouldn't do it they think no one should .How sad would it be if we were all the same? Did you pay for special care for your babies ? Did you claim child benefits? Then why shouldn't she do the same ?My youngest was in SCBU for 11 weeks ...and I didn't pay !!

I'm not saying it is MaryEliza but calling people nasty or moaning old biddies isn't respecting someones opinion. imho.

Who exactly is saying on here that people are not entitled to their view . The is a forum. On some threads views/ opinions are expressed ( with varying degrees of strength and based on varying degrees of facts, knowledge or experience) . Being disagreed with even robustly is not challenging anyone’s right to express their views.

Shelagh6 you are right. Everyone is entitled to their view.

If you only have 2 children, PECS, there will not be enough people to keep society going. You have to allow for enough new humans for gender, death in childhood, disease epidemics, wars, etc. The minimum requirement is 2.4 children apparently.
POGS, well written.

POGS there is often hypocrisy in situations like this.
I do not assume, because they already had kids, they will be a wonderful 2 round parents! They may be but I do not know their AC!
My view is you should only have any children if you can afford to clothe, feed & house them. I also think that we should really only replace ourselves. i.e max 2 kids per couple. Gets hard in a second / third relationship I know. But in principle that is what I believe is good.
Even if I was a multi millionaire I would not think I had a right to add to the overpopulation of the world.
I am talking within the context of our ( & similar) relatively wealthy countries.
Unfortunately once children are born a society has a shared responsibility to ensure the children are safe & healthy.

The problem with this sort of issue is that it is seen as an opportunity to have a go at all sorts of targets - obese people, people who smoke, people who drink, people on benefit, people on drugs, people who are not British citizens, people who take part in certain sports, etc etc etc.

Whether you think this lady is irresponsible or not, the babies have been born and they need to be cared for and, in my opinion, that is the crux of the matter. Once we get into "deserving" and "undeserving" territory, it is impossible to encompass everybody's view of who is entitled to something and who is not.

Isn't it funny how the amount of children we should have varies in opinion and it appears to cause a certain amount of hypocrisy in general. Some people will hold an opinion over one mother/ father scenario and a different opinion over another mother/father senario. Very strange.

1). Woman goes to Cyprus and self funds IVF treatment , has 4 babies and to some she should pay for their NHS care and their up keep even though she is a British citizen.

Woman has 4 children with 4 different fathers , no income other than state aid and she has ' rights ' and it is evil to criticise her ' right to bare children ' and if you mention the cost of her children to the NHS and up keep you will be a vile person.
---

2). Woman has children at 50 and is chastised for being too old.

A man fathers children in his 50's, 60's, 70's and might be chastised but for the most part isn't.
----

3). A woman and/or a man have 6 children and are cruelly hounded by some for having them even though they can do the right thing and provide for and nurture their children .

A woman and / or a man have 6 children, possibly different mothers/fathers to their children , provides nothing financially or nurture to their upkeep and they ' have their right to bare children ' and the state has the duty to pay not only for the NHS but everything else that goes with raising their children.
--

To me it all comes down to personal responsibility and it does not rest with how many children we have as individuals but how we can provide for those children.

The age of becoming a parent does come in to play a tad but this woman at 50 could have been a grandmother who sadly lost her child and took over his/her family, her grandchildren. Should a 50 year old grandmother be deemed as too old to raise her grandchildren?

This woman had paid for her IVF treatment, was a British citizen , presumably will not be on benefit other than what she is entitled to . She will no doubt be a wonderful mother who will nurture her children with love and with the wealth of experience she has in raising a family. Yet some who chastise her, criticise her would possibly hold a totally different view over another parent who is feckless and quite possibly should be criticised for having children but ' has rights ' to bare as many children as they want.

It is a very complex situation and taken on an individual basis I think this woman is getting a bit of a rough ride .

Excuse my indifference to the 'poor womans' situation.

Women of fifty and older are having babies naturally these days. IVF is becoming scarce as the NHS cuts back so more who need it go abroad where it is cheaper.

The risk with IVF is multiple births and this happened to this poor woman, not one child but a whole extra family in middle age. The pregnancy must have been horrendous, carrying one at 30 years old is tough but three at 50?

Happily all three survived but they need extra care for a while. The NHS must do that, god forbid we see the day when we pick and choose who gets treatment to save their lives. We don't refuse treatment to kids who do risky sports and break legs, arms or even backs.

It's very easy to judge from a distance but there is a real human story there somewhere which we won't get by ready media reports.

The poor woman has got three babies to care for, will be awake most of 24 hours for the next 2-3 years, will have no social life, her world will revolve around not the fun of having a late baby but the carnival of three new members of her family and the huge amount of work entailed.

Who is talking about money? Babies multiplied by three are enormously expensive, use your imagination. Why does the hint of money always bring out the green eyes monster?

I think it’s a shame that views are being heavily criticised - it is a forum for ‘opinions’ - all opinions are interesting and Gransnet have given us a chance to either ‘vent our spleen’ or ‘criticise’ and even ‘agree’ - all opinions are fine surely and no one is out to be nasty!

JSP also says that this woman lives apart from her husband - hmmmmmm

Janet Street-Porter says in the iPaper “barriers to older women having babies are simply unfair”. Do these self righteous women have any idea how much energy you need to have children as an older mum? She also says “the nasty trend to denigrate older mums is completely mystifying”. What a total ass she is - she’s never had any and doesn’t know what she is saying. That’s my opinion!!!

It was certainly a choice I would not have made..had "tubes tied" at 40.
I hope no other sick or needy neo natals were forced to travel distances to find appropriate care as a result of this multiple birth.
Choice / ageism etc. are all part of this debate and if she had become pregnant with quads, naturalky, aged 50 plus we would all be empathising with her! What most of us find hard to comprehend was her thinking behind her decision!