66-year old British woman Pregnant

[cara]

Using US stats, a 66 yro woman has a life expectancy of 19 years and:
82% likelihood of living 10 years to 76
67% chance of living 15 yrs to 81
47% chance of living 20 yrs to 86
25% chance of living 25 yrs to 91 and
9% chance of living 30 yrs to 96

you could probably come up with a more relevant set of odds using british stats and information specific to the woman, like smoking, heath and family history.

But the odds are fairly good that the kid will make it to adulthood with a living mother... and there better be some awfully careful backup plans in case it doesn''t work out that way. But all parents should have life insurance, godparent plans, etc.

 

[icekid]

Date: 5/20/2009 9:04:04 PM
Author: cara
Using US stats, a 66 yro woman has a life expectancy of 19 years and:
82% likelihood of living 10 years to 76
67% chance of living 15 yrs to 81
47% chance of living 20 yrs to 86
25% chance of living 25 yrs to 91 and
9% chance of living 30 yrs to 96

you could probably come up with a more relevant set of odds using british stats and information specific to the woman, like smoking, heath and family history.

But the odds are fairly good that the kid will make it to adulthood with a living mother... and there better be some awfully careful backup plans in case it doesn''t work out that way. But all parents should have life insurance, godparent plans, etc.

living does not necessarily mean able to take care of a baby/ child/ teenager though.

 

[cara]

Yeah, I guess I just hope the contingency plans for childraising/mother elder care are good ones.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I will have to agree with SDL and Holly. I think it is wrong on many levels. We were older (40) when we adopted our third child, and it does not escape me that she has some friends whose mothers are in their early 30''s. She has even said to me that she doesn''t want me to die because she knows I am older than other moms. I really wanted to adopt one more after her, but one of the major considerations was being there for the child through college, a wedding, and hopefully grandchildren. I am certainly glad I had my mother through those events and still have her now. I''d like very much for her to be there for my kids'' weddings. But the idea of a single 66 year old having a baby? I think it is incredibly selfish and naive. That child is going to be really sad to have a mother the age of most kids'' grandmothers....if she even makes it until the child grows up. Incidentally, we do have single friends who adopted from China when we did, but they were about 35-48 years older than the children adopted. I felt like that was the upper limit at the time, but we weren''t talking about pregnancy, either.

 

[HollyS]

Date: 5/20/2009 8:32:12 PM
Author: purrfectpear
Are you guys who are against it based on age saying that babies who are orphaned should not be raised by grandparents in their 60''s because they''re ''too old''? Exactly how does a child suffer from being raised by an elder adult? I''m just curious. Like I said, I personally think you''d be crazy to want to have a baby then, but still.....

I''m 56 and admittedly 56 is not 66, but I''m pretty sure I could raise a child just as well now as I did at 30. Probably better because I''m less self centered, more patient, and have learned a thing or two. I just don''t want one

I''m guessing that the chances of living to be 80 something are pretty good?

It isn''t about ''raising'' a child, or even dying before the child is an adult. It is unwise, unhealthy, and unbelievably ridiculous for someone nearing 70 to be pregnant. Many women are raising grandchildren, and doing as well as they possibly can, but they did not choose to give birth at their age.

The hormones, Cara, are given to the would-be mother to prepare her body to carry the baby, not produce an egg. She needs to have a viable uterus to nourish and protect that baby. When you are 66, you can''t do it on your own. If I''m remembering correctly, it takes many months and many treatments for the older IVF patient to be ready for implantation.

As I said before, just because it''s possible, and just because you want something, doesn''t mean it is the right thing to do.

I know it''s her body. I understand it''s her decision. A very unwise decision. I''m going to shut up now.

 

[Sha]

Date: 5/20/2009 8:32:12 PM
Author: purrfectpear
Are you guys who are against it based on age saying that babies who are orphaned should not be raised by grandparents in their 60's because they're 'too old'? Exactly how does a child suffer from being raised by an elder adult? I'm just curious. Like I said, I personally think you'd be crazy to want to have a baby then, but still.....

I'm 56 and admittedly 56 is not 66, but I'm pretty sure I could raise a child just as well now as I did at 30. Probably better because I'm less self centered, more patient, and have learned a thing or two. I just don't want one

I'm guessing that the chances of living to be 80 something are pretty good?

No - no one is saying grandparents shouldn't take care of orphaned children. That's just stepping up to make the best of a probably unexpected, and less than ideal situation. It's quite different from KNOWINGLY creating a situation where your children will likely be orphaned in their youth.

Child-rearing takes a lot of energy. Children need consistent discipline, interaction, and attention, in order to grow and develop in a healthy way. By virtue of age, most elderly adults (not saying all) just don't have the same energy levels as their 30/40 year old counterparts, and may be compromised by physical ailments (like arthritis and glaucoma), and otherwise failing health. In my country, quite a few grandparents do take over the care of their children - but their parenting styles are completely different. The grandparents I've seen who raise their grandchildren generally have less direct interaction with them, in terms of playing and doing certain activities with them. They do a good job of providing for their basic needs, like food/clothing, but seem to be more 'hands off' in other aspects of parenting. I guess many just don't have the energy for it, anymore - and who can blame them?

I'm not saying that younger adults don't have health problems too - but the LIKELIHOOD of a 66-year old woman's having declining health is greater than a 30/40 year old. Bodies decline with age - that's just a physiological fact. I think that in bringing a child into the world at her age, she's intentionally creating a situation where, all things being equal, she probably a) won't be a parent for very long, or b) won't be able to keep up with her child's needs as he/she grows. And it's not necessarily in the best interest of the child to deliberately put him/her into that situation, is it?

 

[diamondsrock]

I also hate to judge but I find this woman''s behavior incredibly selfish. Just because we want something, doesn''t mean it is the right thing to do.

 

[crown1]

interesting thought: do you think she is too old for certain types of clothes, hairdo''s, handbags, etc? how about careers, exotic dancer, hooters waitress, bathing suit model? i have read comments to the effect that women of this age have had their time and they should keep their child raising thoughts to themselves. is this a case of it depends on whether it suits "you" on whether it is right? i think how it impacts the woman, the child, extended family and friends and society determine whether it is advisable. in this case, i think the risks outweigh the benefits to everyone. again, i don''t have anything in this and am only commenting because it has been reported. she is free to give birth and i am free to think it is unwise and selfish.