An Absurd Situation

Some time ago, I read an article that had me gobsmacked. A 62 year old child psychologist from Lewes, East Sussex, Patricia Rashbrook became pregnant via in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Now she could not do this in Europe because of restrictive laws on assisted reproduction. So she and her Italian doctor when to an unnamed former Soviet republic to do the procedure. As of few weeks ago, she was seven months pregnant.

It is not as if she did not have any kids before; she has a 26-year-old daughter and a 22-year old son. And now at 62, she will have a newborn. And her second husband is about her age also.

I am not against having kids or being ageist here, but let’s get real. Yes, she could live for another 20 to 30 years. But at the same time, she could get sick and gone within 5 years. Or what if she were to get Alzheimer's? Or the husband?

Some may argue that a young couple face similar issues when they have a kid. One could get sick or something serious could happen, liking being in an accident. Yet the other person of the couple is young enough to possibly raise the child on their own. Also there is, often, an extended family to help.

These people are in their 60’s. Their friends most likely are of similar age. Their own kids wouldn’t really want to help take care of the new brother/sister. They have their own lives to live. Do they know what they are getting themselves into?

The husband is quoted as saying:

A great deal of thought has been given to providing for the child's present and future well-being, medically, socially and materially

And I really wonder. Fine, she wants another kid. But what about adopting? There are so many kids out there looking for parents, why bring in another one into the world? And have to traipse off to another country because what you are going to do breaks the law of the country you are in?

If she was in her 20’s or 30’s and could not conceive, I can see it. There is something special about having your own children. But at 62? And after having your own children already?

She is a child psychologist. Did she think about how this will affect her child as it is growing up? When the child is just starting school, both parents will almost be 70. When it hits high school, they will be about 75.

All it’s friends will have parents half their age, which will be strange enough. It is hard enough for ‘normal’ aged parents to understand their growing kids, what of parents almost twice the normal age? Be it music, TV or movies, what connection with the child and these parents have?

Just because you can do it, doesn’t mean you should. If these two really want to have kids and make a difference, there are so many other options. I already mentioned adopting. There is fostering also. There are ways they can make a difference in a child’s life without having one of their own.

It makes me wonder if they are doing this for the right reason. I would like to be sitting in front of them because I have tons of questions to ask. The key one is why?

We are living in a society where many people get children for the wrong reasons. All too often, they are meant to be trophies. Neither parent wants to quit working so they dump the kid in day cares.

Yes, there are cases where they both have to work to be able to support the kid. Then again, why have one at this time? Why not save up, put money away, so when the kid comes, one parent can be home for a while?

I see too many kids, with young parents, who only see their parents at night, when they come home from work. And then, because they are tired, the parents don’t have much energy to do anything with their kids. And the weekends become time for household chores, so quality time with the kids is restricted.

These kids are growing up without full parental control and guidance. Their mentors become the daycare, school, other friends and the TV. And then the parents wonder why they are out of control or hold onto values they don’t agree with.

Years ago, we had a nuclear family. If mum and dad weren’t around, there were grandparents, aunts, uncles and the extended family unit. That is extremely rare nowadays. The necessary guidance for kids growing up has become skewed.

I suppose one advantage this kid is going to have, is that both parents most likely are close to retiring. They most likely have saved up some money. So they can provide quality time. But for how long?

It is just that I see people out there having kids for the wrong reasons. Raising a child is one of the most important responsibilities someone has and should never take it lightly. The welfare of the child comes first, all focus should be there. Two people in the mid-60’s can only give so much.

Yeah, I am gay and won’t have kids. But I see the responsibility having children entails. It is not like getting a dog or cat. But more and more, I am seeing couples who feel that way. And the loser in the equation becomes the children.

I am 48 and would like to have children, be it fostered or adopted. But at the same time, I know my own mortality. Right now I am healthy and plan to be so for some time. But be it my smoking or genetics, who knows what will happen in a few years. To bring a child into my life, at this age, adds complications which hurts the child more than me.

I suppose we live in a selfish society where we come first and everyone comes in second. This may not be the driving factor for Ms. Rashbrook. She may honestly want to have more children. But at what cost to the child about to be introduced into this world? Did she and her husband really consider all the aspects of bringing up a child in this brave new world? I really wonder.

For me, at 62, if I had been working consistently and saved, the idea of having a new born wouldn’t come to mind. I would want to enjoy my free time. What ever happened to the idea of retiring and travelling?