Dying woman wants IVF, do you agree she should?

[impatient1]

What about couples that freeze sperm before the man is sent away in a war only later if he dies to conceive a child w/it?
Is that weird? Yes...I don't see a problem with it though.
Again, if everything is well planned out and the child is loved and taken care of I don't think it's wrong or selfish.

ETA: This child would be conceived through love, unconventional love but LOVE. The friends love her enough to do this for her and they will love this child very much I am sure -- not only that the biological father will be there.

I agree with this post.
I think that she should be allowed to as it is well planned out by the sounds of it. Saying yes on the idea that they have discussed and agreed to the following:
- What would happen if she doesn't pass for a longer period of time then expected.
- The surogate mother/step-mother and father have and will go to some sort of counselling.
- The surrogate mother/step-mother will be part of the child's every day life before the mother is too ill to care for the child or passes.

 

[Dragonfly]

havnt read all the thread.

but I think if she has parents there for the baby then why not ? some people struggle to have children and she would be giving life as well as a couple a child that will be well looked after i would assume. Its sad though that that child wont know its real mum but when it grows up I am sure they will be happy at being given life. I expect this would be very hard on the mum also not being able to know her child growing up more than the child who will have someone look after it.

 

[Dopeyjopey]

I'd like to give a well worded response but i'm on my phone so can't really. So instead, can I just ditto everything Jody has said please?

 

[Aidan's Mummy]

I am really undecided on this one as it's such a emotional and hard choice to make.

On one hand I can understand her longing for a child and the tragic situation she is in it has made this become a very big thing and something she feels she has to do before she passes. She has created a stable home for the baby, for when she is gone. So it will be like a surrogacy.

On the other hand is it right to create a child with the view of being his/her mother knowing she is going to die? Also as she is so ill will she be able to carry a healthy baby to term? Will her body be able to cope? In addition the time left to live is a very rough estimate they can't pinpoint to the day when a person is going to die. What happens if she has less time and she dies whilst carrying the child. The child could be severly premature and die or have a serious disability. It is not black and white, it has so many factors to consider.

It really is about ethics. And when ethics are involved it is very hard to come to a solid conclusion as they are so many factors to consider
xx

 

[Dragonfly]

Surrogacy is what it is basically. The baby normally dosnt get to see real mum after that anyway once its handed to the parents so i see no difference.

 

[Jody R]

I am really undecided on this one as it's such a emotional and hard choice to make.

On one hand I can understand her longing for a child and the tragic situation she is in it has made this become a very big thing and something she feels she has to do before she passes. She has created a stable home for the baby, for when she is gone. So it will be like a surrogacy.

On the other hand is it right to create a child with the view of being his/her mother knowing she is going to die? Also as she is so ill will she be able to carry a healthy baby to term? Will her body be able to cope? In addition the time left to live is a very rough estimate they can't pinpoint to the day when a person is going to die. What happens if she has less time and she dies whilst carrying the child. The child could be severly premature and die or have a serious disability. It is not black and white, it has so many factors to consider.
It really is about ethics. And when ethics are involved it is very hard to come to a solid conclusion as they are so many factors to consider
xx

She won't be the one carrying her child. She will have her own eggs taken and implanted in her best friend. It's the best friends husband who will donate the sperm.

So when she dies her child will be raised by it's biological father and the woman who carried and gave birth to it. But there is no risk of her being damaged by pregnancy or dying while pregnant.

 

[Aidan's Mummy]

What if she never gets to see the child?
xx

 

[lozzy21]

Nop i dont think its right. Just because her friends are happy to do it now dosent mean they will be in a few years time. What if they split up? Who gets the child? How do you explain that to a child whe its older?

Even if its a baby when the biological mum dies it will still greave for the parent it dident know as an adult. Every one involved would need so much counciling.

My aunt donated her eggs to her friend and she needed to have mounths of counciling before they would do the retreval and that was with a straight foward dotation. Chances are the woman would die before the baby was born. How would she cope if her friend miscarried?

For me a baby should be made out of a couples love for each other, wether that be a man and a women, two women or two men but shes doing it for selfish reasons. If she was in a relationship and the baby would be fatherd and then looked after by her partner then id feel different.

 

[dizzyisacow]

in the specific situation i have no problem with it since the child will have 2 parents to raise it

 

[Dragonfly]

Nop i dont think its right. Just because her friends are happy to do it now dosent mean they will be in a few years time. What if they split up? Who gets the child? How do you explain that to a child whe its older?

Even if its a baby when the biological mum dies it will still greave for the parent it dident know as an adult. Every one involved would need so much counciling.

My aunt donated her eggs to her friend and she needed to have mounths of counciling before they would do the retreval and that was with a straight foward dotation. Chances are the woman would die before the baby was born. How would she cope if her friend miscarried?

For me a baby should be made out of a couples love for each other, wether that be a man and a women, two women or two men but shes doing it for selfish reasons. If she was in a relationship and the baby would be fatherd and then looked after by her partner then id feel different.

So you dont agree with surrogacy for people who cant have children or even adoption? Two people can be loving and bring up a child thats not theirs and be grateful for it.

Personally I dont think its selfish she gives life and to people who will look after that life. And if her friend miscarried well she is going to die anyway she wouldnt have to cope with it for long.

I thought the dad was looking after baby here anyway?

 

[lozzy21]

Nop i dont think its right. Just because her friends are happy to do it now dosent mean they will be in a few years time. What if they split up? Who gets the child? How do you explain that to a child whe its older?

Even if its a baby when the biological mum dies it will still greave for the parent it dident know as an adult. Every one involved would need so much counciling.

My aunt donated her eggs to her friend and she needed to have mounths of counciling before they would do the retreval and that was with a straight foward dotation. Chances are the woman would die before the baby was born. How would she cope if her friend miscarried?

For me a baby should be made out of a couples love for each other, wether that be a man and a women, two women or two men but shes doing it for selfish reasons. If she was in a relationship and the baby would be fatherd and then looked after by her partner then id feel different.

So you dont agree with surrogacy for people who cant have children or even adoption? Two people can be loving and bring up a child thats not theirs and be grateful for it.

Personally I dont think its selfish she gives life and to people who will look after that life. And if her friend miscarried well she is going to die anyway she wouldnt have to cope with it for long.

I thought the dad was looking after baby here anyway?

I dont understand how you get that from my post?

 

[Dragonfly]

Nop i dont think its right. Just because her friends are happy to do it now dosent mean they will be in a few years time. What if they split up? Who gets the child? How do you explain that to a child whe its older?

Even if its a baby when the biological mum dies it will still greave for the parent it dident know as an adult. Every one involved would need so much counciling.

My aunt donated her eggs to her friend and she needed to have mounths of counciling before they would do the retreval and that was with a straight foward dotation. Chances are the woman would die before the baby was born. How would she cope if her friend miscarried?

For me a baby should be made out of a couples love for each other, wether that be a man and a women, two women or two men but shes doing it for selfish reasons. If she was in a relationship and the baby would be fatherd and then looked after by her partner then id feel different.

So you dont agree with surrogacy for people who cant have children or even adoption? Two people can be loving and bring up a child thats not theirs and be grateful for it.

Personally I dont think its selfish she gives life and to people who will look after that life. And if her friend miscarried well she is going to die anyway she wouldnt have to cope with it for long.

I thought the dad was looking after baby here anyway?

I dont understand how you get that from my post?

I dont know how you didnt mean that as thats what I am reading. Its the same as someone being adopted is it not? what if adopted parents break up and have to tell kid they are adopted etc? plenty give babies up that go on to live after to couples to this one just happens to not be living to long after.

I am trying to understand here why its ok for a couple to only give birth. why cant someone else look after this baby?

 

[PeanutBean]

From lozzy's post I got that she meant a baby should only be created out of a couple's love, not that a couple should only have a baby they have created. Obviously in a case of same sex couples the baby can only be obtained through adoption/surrogacy/sperm donation so I don't see that lozzy said anything against these ways of getting a child. Just that the creation of a child for one woman who then won't even be around isn't right. Sorry if I'm putting words into your mouth lozzy!

It's funny because if this story was about a woman wanting a baby but who has no partner and she's getting on so seeks sperm donation I just wouldn't mind. For me there being a couple ready to bring up the baby doesn't seem to make it right. If the best friend is otherwise infertile and between the three of them the dying woman gets to help her friend and leave a legacy I wouldn't mind so much perhaps because they might've been seeking a way to have children anyway. Something about this scenario just doesn't sit comfortably with me.

It's straying a bit OT but I personally prefer adoption to surrogacy.

 

[Dragonfly]

Oh ok just thought giving life and maybe some people who cant be parents a chance would be good.

Aint here to start a row just interested. I am to tired and feel to crappy to row .

 

[lozzy21]

From lozzy's post I got that she meant a baby should only be created out of a couple's love, not that a couple should only have a baby they have created. Obviously in a case of same sex couples the baby can only be obtained through adoption/surrogacy/sperm donation so I don't see that lozzy said anything against these ways of getting a child. Just that the creation of a child for one woman who then won't even be around isn't right. Sorry if I'm putting words into your mouth lozzy!

It's funny because if this story was about a woman wanting a baby but who has no partner and she's getting on so seeks sperm donation I just wouldn't mind. For me there being a couple ready to bring up the baby doesn't seem to make it right. If the best friend is otherwise infertile and between the three of them the dying woman gets to help her friend and leave a legacy I wouldn't mind so much perhaps because they might've been seeking a way to have children anyway. Something about this scenario just doesn't sit comfortably with me.

It's straying a bit OT but I personally prefer adoption to surrogacy.

Yep thats what i ment, you explained it better than i did lol.

 

[rubixcyoob.]

Nop i dont think its right. Just because her friends are happy to do it now dosent mean they will be in a few years time. What if they split up? Who gets the child? How do you explain that to a child whe its older?

Even if its a baby when the biological mum dies it will still greave for the parent it dident know as an adult. Every one involved would need so much counciling.

My aunt donated her eggs to her friend and she needed to have mounths of counciling before they would do the retreval and that was with a straight foward dotation. Chances are the woman would die before the baby was born. How would she cope if her friend miscarried?

For me a baby should be made out of a couples love for each other, wether that be a man and a women, two women or two men but shes doing it for selfish reasons. If she was in a relationship and the baby would be fatherd and then looked after by her partner then id feel different.

I guess anyone who had a child without a FOB present, when there was no love there, a mistake from a one night stand or in my case getting pregnant before I loved my OH, we should all have gotten rid of our children. They were not created out of love, they were created out of a moment of passion within which lay a mistaken contraceptive.
Yet we all kept our children because we wanted to, selfishly of course! Every parent keeps a child because they are selfish. They want their child and the child has no say - that's selfish. They want the love and want to love - thats's selfish because the child may not want them.
The choice to keep a baby is entirely selfish, but in a good way.

Not every child is created through love for the other person. Mine's wasn't. Sure I love my OH now, but then it wasn't true love, I cared deeply for him, very deeply.
So what makes my son created outwith love or a child from a one night stand never to know its other parent etc. different from this one?

And from what I can see, this child is created through love. A very stong love. Sure it's not a couple in love, but it's a couple who love their friend and a couple who will love this child. Surely that's love?

 

[lesleyann]

i think its wrong tbh and kind of the like whole 65year old IVF thing everyone was up in arms about it with the chance the mother may not see the child get married ect however this women stands no chance what so ever of being here for those things. Just because her friend is happy now does not mean she will be happy about her hubby having a child with another women IYKWIM?? and what if once the bio mother dies the surro decides she is raising this child as her own never to tell her/him about her bio-mother? To many things left unanswered and that could possibly go wrong for the child.

If i found out my mother had me while on her death bed i would be well pee'd off knowing she had me and knew she would never be there for me as a mother, i would not think OMG she obv really wanted me i would think why would my mum have me knowing she wont be here to see me and be my mother why did she have me???

 

[PeanutBean]

I think this situation is totally different from unplanned pregnancies and being a single parent. In those situations the mother's chosen to keep the baby and will expect to be a mother to it. This situation is so contrived. It's really quite odd.

 

[lozzy21]

The situation is different from unplanned pregnacys, they are beond(sp?) our control. My baby was unplanned but was still made out of love. I dont see how keeping an unplanned baby is selfish, for me its the other way round but we wont get on to that.

 

[Scamp]

You said exactly what I think lol.
x

Yes I think she should be allowed.

THis has all been thought out and cared for. Just because she is ill it doesn't mean she shouldn't be allowed to have children. Anyone of us could get terminally ill, does that mean we shouldn't be allowed our kids? At the end of the day, the same fate awaits us.

No matter what happens to this woman, whether she has her child for a few weeks or dies before birth, this child will be loved and cared for. The mothers best friends love her enough to do this, so they will love her child. Not to mention the maternal grandparents will love their grandchild.
Plus, the father and surrogate mum would basically just be like a child living with it's step mother and father if their mother passed away - in fact, no like about it, the child would be living with its father and step mother. Why would that be so wrong? It wouldn't ...
This child is already loved so much by everyone.

Say the woman does die before birth, she'll die happy, knowing that she had a baby, her baby. Who cares if the baby wasn't born yet? We all know the unconditional love we felt for our childre and I feel hers will be greater, because her time is limited.

Say the woman dies after birth. For a few short weeks she got to be a mother. She done something everyone should be able to do. Being a mother is the greatest thing ever, why deny her of that? The child wouldn't end up with strangers.

There's also the fact that the woman may live longer than 12 months. It has been known to happen. In fact, there is a medical civil case about a man who sued his doctor for negligence because the man was terminally ill and the doctor gave him 6 months to live. The man lived longer and claimed the dcotor was negligent in that aspect. He won it as well. The name mistakes me but it does highlight how this woman could have a few months out her child, a year maybe. Not a lot in the grand scheme of things, but enough to be a parent, enough to fill her with happiness and joy.

Also, if the woman died before child birth, the baby would not be affected, it is being carried by someone else and will be born and raised by it's family. A step mother, a father and 3 sets of grand parents.

Sure a child has the right to know it's parents, but as many people on here know, that isn't always the case. It's not as if this mother is willingly abandoning her child, she is going to leave it cared for, loved, in a thought out plan and will know her, evne if she isn't around, she will still find out who her mother was.


Just my views.