Lucysnow; let's go ahead and wrap this up.
Because the EXPERTS do not agree with You. This woman ended up traveling all the way to Russia to find someone willing to just take the money.
No one else would give her IVF. They refused.
I don't think the issue is the technology (bogus) or the morality (abstract)...
It's that you Dislike the Idea that someone can be told they can't.
It's a trend for you, I've noticed. In fact, it's a pretty strong one.
So no more red herrings.
Grandparents is a red herring. In an emergency situation, it is deemed better to give children who lost parents to next of kin. But that doesn't mean they WILL go to the grandparents and yes, age can play a factor in that.
It's still preferable, in an emergency situation, than to give them to a complete stranger.
This topic is not like that. It's not an emergency situation. The parents were not lost.
It's about a woman that selfishly obsessed about wanting her own kids. That did not care about how that child might fare- Who will that child go to if she dies (A High Risk at her age)? Next of Kin? Or foster care?
She's creating the strong potential for that emergency with her senseless carelessness.
You're only real issue is that you don't like people saying she CAN'T. Well, take that up with the Doctors.
For me, I don't believe it should be on the law books.
I just think she's an idiot, a selfish one, and I expressed that. I could be wrong. Maybe they both will turn out fantastic.
I rather doubt it.
No I didn't ask for an reason why an 83 year old should or shouldn't be able to undergo IVF, I just offered a quote where a bioethicist said one can give a child to a woman UP UNTIL 83.
This woman in question was given IVF in her 40's and it didn't work so the treatment ended. IVF treatment in the UK is a publicly funded affair with a long waiting list and quite controversial as many do not believe it should be part of the National Health Service. Later she still had a desire and went to the Ukraine to have it done, Greece and Eastern Europe are popular places to go for this since there is no waiting list and the procedure is less than half the cost. For those who still think that the Ukraine is part of Russia I have only to say you need a revised map since the soviet union was disbanded.
Now I never claimed the technology was bogus, I asked if it needed a regulation age cap. Please go back and show me where she was refused IVF? She wasn't told she couldn't do it, her own physician, if you bothered to read the article and not just talk out of your arse had had the same bloody procedure done at the age of 63!! Go and read through the link of births over the designated age and you will see that there have been many (in europe as well as the US) who have become pregnant because of IVF, so please i would like to know where you had the idea that these women were being refused.
I never said it was a trend 'for me' I said it COULD become a trend as there are more cases like this, one in point is the woman from India who had twins using this procedure, she lied about her age and had it done in the US. She has since died but at the time she was the oldest woman to become pregnant through IVF.
I also never said I liked or disliked anything. Looking at the list of pregnancies women are having babies in their 50's and 60's. If they were being refused treatment then they wouldn't be having them!:shrug: So what you assume is an erroneous non-argument to say the very least.
You claimed that this person is too old to parent so I asked if grandparents are too old to parent. It was responding to what you had said not bringing up a red herring.
You asked where he child would go if she died, well she is not without extended family and she is not without wealth, she has supposedly made arrangements like most parents do. I know my parents made those kind of arrangements for me and they were young parents.
You said: She's creating the strong potential for that emergency with her senseless carelessness.
What emergency? Why is she any more careless or senseless than a very poor person having a child? Or a very young parent? Or someone who is physically or mentally disabled? Actually I would put her more responsible than any of those examples and right under the too young parent.
As usual you are not really listening to my question which is this:
Outside of 'she's too old' which obviously she is not if the procedure can take, can you come up with any reason whatsoever why this procedure is detrimental to society, the woman or the child?
Does that question help break it down and simplify for you?
Again the only person who says she can't do it or she was told she couldn't do it is you.
So regardless of your personal feelings about her or your false accusations of where I stand on the issue...let get back to whether you can offer a solid argument that isn't tinged with your own bias shall we. And it is a bias but not an argument you are offering. There are those who think 17 too young to marry, in some states its legal and in others are not, some might accuse those who marry that young of being selfish and careless and god only knows what, but still there is no logical reason outside of our bias on the subject. I'm asking you be (oh shocking) think objectively for a valid argument.
Question for you who will Never fly (at least intellectually):
Outside of 'she's too old' which obviously she is not if the procedure can take, can you come up with any reason whatsoever why this procedure is detrimental to society, the woman or the child that is above normal negative possibilities?