Rao Devi of Haryana, India, has given birth to a daughter. No big deal, really. Women have babies every day -- except that Rao Devi is 70 years old. She and her 72-year-old husband have been married and childless for 50 years. After 10 years of childlessness, he also married her sister, but no children were born of that marriage, either. This child was conceived in vitro utilizing someone else's egg, naturally. Or unnaturally, as the case may be.
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but this is in my opinion a travesty. 70-year-old women were not meant to bear children. That's the whole purpose of menopause. I can't fathom how any doctor could in good conscience facilitate this. Yes, the parents finally got their wish, but what about the child? More than likely, she'll be orphaned before she reaches adulthood. True, she'll have her life, however it came into being, but isn't a life which almost guarantees she'll lose her parents while still a child doing her a grave disservice?
I find this disturbing. Personally, I believe the doctor's actions were irresponsible, perhaps even immoral. By what criteria did he judge how safely a 70-year-old woman who'd never had a child could carry the baby to term and safely deliver? How could he be sure that the child would suffer no ill effects? Just because you technologically can do something doesn't mean you should -- which is why they don't permit human cloning. I know I'd never consider pregnancy and childbirth at that age. Shoot, I wouldn't consider it at this age. The only diapers I plan to be changing at 70+ are grandchildrens'. Ditto chasing after toddlers. Geriatric pregnancy is unnatural and, in the end, nature does know best.
Then again, maybe I'm just cranky today. Maybe this wouldn't have creeped me out yesterday. And maybe it won't tomorrow. What do you think?
10 comments:
I look at it differently. Between the 3 of them, they can get volume discounts on diapers.
shelley's
frankenstein
foretold of this
but then, frankenstein
was mere art -- ultimately far less creepy than our real world...
married the sister, too -- ha ha ah aha aha ha ha aha haha aha ha ha
¤ ¤ ¤
/t.
I guess it all depends how she looks...:p
xoxbgxox
Puerileuwaite's clever comment notwithstanding, I think this is a terrible travesty. At age 10, this poor child will have parents in their 80's who themselves will probably need the care they should be providing their child. It's horrible.
Well, there is that, Pugsley. I suppose that would qualify as the silver lining factor.:)
Sometimes art mirrors life, /t., and sometimes life mirrors art. I'm not sure which is creepier. You're amused by the sister act, are you? LOL.:)
She looks about 90, Galen. Not a hip young (or young looking) emo chick at all.:)
I agree with you, Bilbo. Any way you look at it, it's just wrong.
I try to figure it out to get a new born to day and that is not an option - it sure would be crazy ;)
These are strange times, Fancy.:)
There's a bunch of ways to look at this, so leave it to me to come up with this 'un: when mendon'tpause, this is what happens! Now, he's getting up at 2am! Then again, at his age, his enlarged prostate is making him get up every other hour, anyway...
*ducking boos and throwd test tubes*
you feel cranky? Full moon on the 12th...
No diapers for these children, here they use wash & wear nappies in that class section of society!
& I am wonder how did they manage to squeeze out sperm from Geriatrix!
Was it Abraham's wife or his Mother who gave birth at the age of 90?
Well, then, I'd say it serves him right, Skunk, if he can't figure out when to pause. LOL.:)
I know, Mona. That darn moon. I'm thinking about putting out a contract on it. Diapers or nappies, I wouldn't want to put up with them in my old age. I believe it was Abraham's wife who was the geriatric mother. Of course, who knows how they marked time in those days. She could have been 30 and thought she was 90.:)
Post a Comment