Dying woman wants IVF, do you agree she should?

[hopeandpray]

There are single women that use sperm donors all the time. This baby will be raised by one biological parent just the same as their babies will. I don't see how this baby wasn't born out of love, she wants to be a parent. She wants a chance to have and to love a child the same as any mother ttc does.
If it was just her that wanted the baby and she had no plan for after she died it would be different. But it seems like the baby will be well looked after and loved so in a very odd way it's almost like she's a surrogate or mother giving her baby up for adoption but the same time will get to be a mum for a little while

 

[debbie7155]

I believe she has a right, who is to judge a person who can or can not have a child,
Think about it...The minute were born were dying..I know if i had 1 wish if i was dying i would want to have a child, but this is coming from someone who gave up hope after 18yrs of trying, im not so lucky like some girls who just drops their knickers & get pregnant & then cant be arsed to be a proper mother & then end up giving it away to be adopted by strangers
So yes if that child is going to be brought up by people that is going to love it then i hope her dream comes true xxxx

 

[cherryglitter]

We could all be killed at any time in our lives. (Bit morbid I know!)
I don't really see how this is any different, apart from she knows when she is going.
So at least provisions will be put into place for her child to be looked after when she is no longer here.

 

[RainbowDrop_x]

I'm not really sure how I feel about this. If I was terminally ill and didn't have any children then my one wish would be the same as this ladies. I could never imagine myself going through life and not having children.. I just couldn't.

On the other hand a part of me feels like an action like this is a little selfish. I really don't know. I know I said it would be my wish in the same position but there is a huge part of me that thinks bringing a child into the world KNOWING that you won't be around to watch it grow and have it's own life is a little bit too much.

Good thread.

 

[PeanutBean]

Of course I can't know for sure not ever being in the situation, but if I was terminally ill before having children I'm not sure the idea of surrogacy would even enter my head.

 

[Nic1107]

I think it's lovely. The baby will be raised by its father and the woman who carried and gave birth to it; the baby will be instinctively more attached to the woman who gave birth as she will still be in its life to take care of it, and it grew in her, ykwim? Then, in time, the couple can explain to the child that he was born from a donated egg, and that his 'egg-mommy' loved him very much and will always be an angel watching over him. The dying woman will hopefully get to see her baby before she passes away, and can go to heaven with her heart full. The child will be raised by his loving father and literal birth-mother, like any child from a donated egg would be. I respectfully disagree that a baby must be born from a couple's love for one another- that discounts single mothers who use a sperm donor, anyone who is single and adopts a child, etc. I know not everyone agrees that those should be done but I think any child who will be raised with love will turn out just fine (generally speaking) and non-traditional families are no exception. People carry a child knowing they will give it up for adoption all the time- they have a child they know they will not raise. The woman in question isn't even carrying the child, just supplying the egg. And I fully believe that this child is to be conceived out of love- love between friends, love for the baby, love between the carrying mother and her husband, the natural father. They all become family together, and I think such love is as beautiful as any other.

 

[coccyx]

very selfish

 

[Dream.A.Dream]

I only red first 2 pages. My initial reaction was no way. But now I'm not sure because of the circumstances around it xx

 

[PeanutBean]

Another thought. Can the surrogate couple have children? IVF resources are finite (I don't believe in private healthcare) so I think those resources should be used for peoe with long term fertility issues.

 

[Justagirlxx]

Looking at my beautiful, precious son sound asleep in my lap right now, I honestly could never deny someone such a perfect little miracle, even if it were only a few weeks. If the couple is ready to adopt the baby I see no harm in letting the woman fulfill her dream of being a mother, even if it is only for a short time.

 

[NG09]

I think it is totally selfish. She is only thinking of herlsef, not the child who will be left without a mother.

 

[wiiwidow]

I'm sorry I've not read all of the thread yet so apologies if I repeat anything. I totally agree this is a very very difficult situation however I disagree with those who say you shouldn't have a child when you know you are going to die. Well there's nothing more certain than death and taxes as they say, we will all die it's just a question of when. This poor lady has a more definite answer than most of us that's all. My father died 10 days before I was born so I think I have a rough idea as to how this could work out. I grew up knowing I was so loved and so wanted by my father and his family were so loving to me as I was their last reminder. I grew up with 3 sets of grandparents (my mother remarried when I was 2 so I had a father too) but this is a novelty and a great treat as a child I can assure you! lots of extra love, cuddles and presents!

Don't forget that also she's not just doing this for herself but also for her friends and
family so that they have someone left from her after she's gone, which I'm sure they will all be thankful for and will care for and love all the more for her loss.

As I said I know this is difficult but I do believe so much happiness could actually come from this horribly sad situation that it would be worth it. Xx

 

[Pixxie]

Personally I don't see how this can be bad for the child since they would not even be old enough to remember it. The child would be left with 2 loving parents, it's biological father and the woman who carried it for 9 months. I think she should be able to if the 3 of them are happy with the situation xx

 

[Blah11]

I don't agree with it really. I do think it's rather selfish of her.

 

[MrsGlitz]

I'm really undecided on this.

My gut reaction is no because she will die within months of the baby being born, if not before. However, on the other hand they have a lot more support in place in the event of her death than DH and I have in the event of ours; does that mean we shouldn't have had Harry?

It's such a complex and unique situation I don't know what to think.

 

[Laura2919]

I dont think she should be allowed to do this. Its not fair on the child.

 

[lucy_x]

IMO. This lady is not looking out for her child, only herself.

Regardless of wether you are termanally ill or not i think its selfish to give something life if you are never going to care for it!

you wouldnt say "oh im going to go and work away for 18 years after giving birth and never see my child " would you?

maybe some people would. But this lady has obviously not given any thought to her child, only to her own selfish needs.

 

[blinkybaby]

I haven't read all the replies, I wanted to vote first then go back and read them. I voted that she should be able to go ahead with her plan - as long as all the safeguards are in place for the child to be safe and happy within it's family after her death, I think it should be OK. The child will be with its biological father afterwards after all, and the woman who carried it for 9 months and gave birth to it. As long as they are happy to love the child and protect it.

The only problem I can see with this is if she defies the doctors and lives a significantly longer time than predicted - if the child gets to an age where the death of its mother will affect it more than it would at just 12 weeks then I think it could get complicated.

 

[NuKe]

I don't agree with it really. I do think it's rather selfish of her.

agreed.

 

[Arlandria]

This may be sensitive and I don't want to cause upset, I am genuinely interested in how people feel.

I watched The Wright Stuff this morning and they had a discussion about a terminally ill woman who wants IVF before she dies.

She wants to donate an egg, which will be fertilized by her best friends husband and then implanted into and carried by his wife, the dying woman's best friend. She will then care for the baby for as long as she can and then when she passes away the friends will raise the child.

She has been given twelve months to live so this needs to happen quickly and she could have just twelve weeks with her child before she dies.

From what they said on the programme she has always wanted children but is very young and dying from breast cancer. She wants to have the child she always hoped for before she dies and experience motherhood even for just a few weeks. She wants to leave her parents a grandchild to ease their pain at losing her and the friends are happy to help and raise the baby after she is gone. And the baby will be with it's natural father and the woman who carried and gave birth to it.

There was much debate about this issue, which is legal apparently, and not a lot of support for the woman or her plan.

Many people seemed to think she was being selfish and that the child would suffer in some way and were very against her being allowed to continue with this plan.

I just wondered how people here felt.

I am REALLY on the fence with this one.

My initial reaction was "No, thats very selfish of her to want a child knowing she isnt going to be there to bring that child up and support them - she shouldnt be allowed to have IVF"

But then I think "what woman doesnt deserve the chance to be a mother even if for a very short time? - that is something that only she can decide. No one should have that option taken away from them" I also read the situation you write here, and you say that her friend has agreed to care for the baby after the mother has passed away. Here she has already done her best to let that child have a loving family after she has gone.

I really think it depends on the situation if I am being honest. I read here some of the comments off you girls and about how 'she' would be putting herself first and not the baby. On this forum I have read some threads (not recently) about women having one night stands to deliberately get pregnant so that they can have a child, and to my shock a lot of other girls supported this. Is it not the same thing?? Putting the mother first to fulfil her needs yet because this woman is dying this is wrong??

I hope this makes sense

So my final reply would be, it depends on the situation