Baby is born to parents - both over 60

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by frenchperson, Jul 7, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. What's the world coming to? Have they no shame? If I discovered my parents had done an exclusive interview with the gutter press Daily Mail, I'd bleeding disown them... poor kid
  2. Just what we need.

    Extending fertility. :roll:
  3. Wrong on all accounts only positive thing is the kid will no doubt be a home owner by their mid-teens! (unless it's been remortaged to fertiliy treatment)
  4. Frenchperson, if your going to post news, find a link.
  5. Is this the one were the old age bint went to Italy for fertility treatment? is it just me or should fertility treatment on the NHS be banned? I think it should be banned for the following reasons,

    1. It's not an illness etc (cancer is)
    2. cost of it/ success rate quite poor
    3. the money on the wasted attempts could be better spent on treatments that work/research for serious illness etc
  6. Not being able to have children can send some maternal woman quite barmy with depression. Therefor successful IVF can prevent this. The first IVF baby was in 1978 and a lot of children have since been born, it would be wrong to prevent other people the "JOY" of having children.

    There are lots of non illness related treatments available on the NHS breast augmentation, mastopex,Abdominoplasty then there is the surgery like gastric bands etc now these are not an illness, people argue for these so I really don't see the point of your argument.

    As I suffer from a child alergy bordering on phobia. I will not be troubling the NHS for IVF. However I have no issue with thoes who do.
  7. One of the female jurno's caled it Pure Selfishnes on the parents part.
    I know its wrong, not legaly wrong but morally wrong.
  8. Dad going to be able to kick a football round the park with his kid?

    This child is going to have a severe lack of input and nurturing, turning into who knows what.
  9. well at least the child has two parents - I reckon he wil fare a lot better then some kids you see around. I don't approve of IVF partly because there are so many orphans in the world - I am all for adoption
  10. So when the child starts going through its teenage years, both parents will be in their 70's. Its so wrong its bordering on child cruelty
  11. Precisely, the kids going to get some serious stick at school, and that sort of upbringing is certainly not healthy, from both a mental and physical point of view. What I can't get over is the amount of input the kids going to have, you could say that these two are just booking themselves a minder for life.

    Nature intends us to not be able to have kids past a certain age, theres a reason for it, when we need help looking after ourselves, we shouldn't look after others.
  12. Not to mention that by the time the sprog hits 18, the parents are going to be pushing 80 - assuming they're even still alive.
  13. So, next question,

    When these two die, whats going to happen to the sprog? Arn't there health complications for the baby connected with having a kid at this age as well?
  14. [quote="Xplosiverab"Arn't there health complications for the baby connected with having a kid at this age as well?[/quote]

    No the baby was created from a donor egg from what I have read on the subject I have been following the story for some time.
  15. I'm with Brettarider on this one. Women might get depressed because they can't have kids? Wouldn't they get even more depressed when the IVF fails and that one chance you put all your hope in disappears? Besides, I might suffer from depression becuase I'll never be able to make a slam dunk, the NHS going to give me longer legs?