British mum, 59, "I'll give birth to baby of my dead daughter"

[Chef Ramsay]

-Woman is staging legal bid to become pregnant with her own grandchild
-Her daughter's eggs would be fertilised by donor sperm and implanted  
-She and her husband, 58, will claim it was their daughter's dying wish
-Their only child died of bowel cancer four years ago while still in her 20s
-Potentially large risks to the health of the woman and the unborn child

A British woman is staging a desperate legal bid to become pregnant with her own grandchild – using her dead daughter’s eggs.
In the first case of its kind in the world, the woman, 59, and her husband will claim it was their daughter’s dying wish that her eggs be fertilised by donor sperm and implanted into her own mother’s womb. It would be the couple’s only chance to become grandparents after their daughter, an only child, died of bowel cancer four years ago while still in her 20s.

She chose to freeze her eggs in the hope that she could have children in the future, but tragically lost her battle with the disease. No UK-based clinic has agreed to treat the mother, who is now hoping to export the eggs to New York, where a clinic is lined up to provide fertility treatment at an estimated cost of up to £60,000.

At her age, the woman’s chances of becoming pregnant using the eggs are small.
There are potentially large risks to her health, and the health of the unborn child, if fertility treatment succeeds.
However, the woman and her 58-year-old husband say they are determined to honour their daughter’s wishes and the case is now set to be decided by a judge.

More...http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2963277/British-mum-59-bid-world-medical-ll-birth-baby-dead-daughter.html

[1714117326]

1714117326

[1714117326]

1714117326

[1714117326]

1714117326

[1714117326]

1714117326

[1714117326]

1714117326

[Ume]

Lol i can donate my sperms if she wants .

But this is obvious step for this women ?

[pedrog]

The wonders of modern science...

[grendel25]

Reminds me of the fusion thing they do where there can be three parents of a baby now.  Regardless, it's interesting for the family to be able to fulfill a dying wish.

[pattu1]

The wonders of modern science...

The crazy thoughts of people in this modern world.

[twister]

Lol i can donate my sperms if she wants .

But this is obvious step for this women ?

This isn't funny man! 

The woman lost her daughter and now she is willing to risk her health to fulfill her daughter's last wish. Nothing to laugh about.

[rosh]

Lol i can donate my sperms if she wants .

But this is obvious step for this women ?

This isn't funny man! 

The woman lost her daughter and now she is willing to risk her health to fulfill her daughter's last wish. Nothing to laugh about.

The daughter probably needed to be counselled.

[uki]

The wonders of modern science...

Actually, I would say it is a misuse of the achievements of modern science.

[pedrog]

The wonders of modern science...

Actually, I would say it is a misuse of the achievements of modern science.

I agree, the child might grow up without a mother and without a grandmother, this pregnancy is too risky, she could use a surrogate.

[Chef Ramsay]

Stating the obvious is obvious but damn, this woman is gonna be in her late 70s before this kid grows up and gets out of high school - and that's assuming everything goes as planned. I have to believe the kid is going to be teased when his peers either find out about the dynamics here (grandmother had her daughter's kid  ) or that his so-called parents are already in their 70s when everyone else's parents are in their 30s or 40s max. Even if you go the surrogate route, most of my sentiments still apply unless the surrogate plays the roll of mother for real and not pretending that the grandparents are the parents. It'a best if this couple just retires and starts a foundation in memory of their daughter or something.

[pattu1]

I don't see why the husband would risk the life of her Wife for this.

You are assuming the husband gave his consent/took the decision.
It could be the decision of a batty old woman.

[pawel7777]

Stating the obvious is obvious but damn, this woman is gonna be in her late 70s before this kid grows up and gets out of high school - and that's assuming everything goes as planned. I have to believe the kid is going to be teased when his peers either find out about the dynamics here (grandmother had her daughter's kid  ) or that his so-called parents are already in their 70s when everyone else's parents are in their 30s or 40s max. Even if you go the surrogate route, most of my sentiments still apply unless the surrogate plays the roll of mother for real and not pretending that the grandparents are the parents. It'a best if this couple just retires and starts a foundation in memory of their daughter or something.

Oh how I love those ethical/philosophical debates! Just for a sake of discussion:

Is it better if such child is never born, because it won't be teased by other kids and won't be raised by elderly grandparents? Isn't living in tough conditions better than not living at all?

[pedrog]

Stating the obvious is obvious but damn, this woman is gonna be in her late 70s before this kid grows up and gets out of high school - and that's assuming everything goes as planned. I have to believe the kid is going to be teased when his peers either find out about the dynamics here (grandmother had her daughter's kid  ) or that his so-called parents are already in their 70s when everyone else's parents are in their 30s or 40s max. Even if you go the surrogate route, most of my sentiments still apply unless the surrogate plays the roll of mother for real and not pretending that the grandparents are the parents. It'a best if this couple just retires and starts a foundation in memory of their daughter or something.

Oh how I love those ethical/philosophical debates! Just for a sake of discussion:

Is it better if such child is never born, because it won't be teased by other kids and won't be raised by elderly grandparents? Isn't living in tough conditions better than not living at all?

If you don't exist you don't exist, one is not sorrow for not existing...

[pawel7777]

Stating the obvious is obvious but damn, this woman is gonna be in her late 70s before this kid grows up and gets out of high school - and that's assuming everything goes as planned. I have to believe the kid is going to be teased when his peers either find out about the dynamics here (grandmother had her daughter's kid  ) or that his so-called parents are already in their 70s when everyone else's parents are in their 30s or 40s max. Even if you go the surrogate route, most of my sentiments still apply unless the surrogate plays the roll of mother for real and not pretending that the grandparents are the parents. It'a best if this couple just retires and starts a foundation in memory of their daughter or something.

Oh how I love those ethical/philosophical debates! Just for a sake of discussion:

Is it better if such child is never born, because it won't be teased by other kids and won't be raised by elderly grandparents? Isn't living in tough conditions better than not living at all?

If you don't exist you don't exist, one is not sorrow for not existing...

The couple in question is probably in sorrow knowing that they'll die alone without passing their genes on to the next generation.

But my point was, is it a valid argument to say that certain child should not be born because it may have (very) difficult life. Consequently, if such child is born anyway, would you be able to point a finger at it and say "it should've never been born"?

Just a moral dilemma for Tuesday evening...

[pedrog]

Stating the obvious is obvious but damn, this woman is gonna be in her late 70s before this kid grows up and gets out of high school - and that's assuming everything goes as planned. I have to believe the kid is going to be teased when his peers either find out about the dynamics here (grandmother had her daughter's kid  ) or that his so-called parents are already in their 70s when everyone else's parents are in their 30s or 40s max. Even if you go the surrogate route, most of my sentiments still apply unless the surrogate plays the roll of mother for real and not pretending that the grandparents are the parents. It'a best if this couple just retires and starts a foundation in memory of their daughter or something.

Oh how I love those ethical/philosophical debates! Just for a sake of discussion:

Is it better if such child is never born, because it won't be teased by other kids and won't be raised by elderly grandparents? Isn't living in tough conditions better than not living at all?

If you don't exist you don't exist, one is not sorrow for not existing...

The couple in question is probably in sorrow knowing that they'll die alone without passing their genes on to the next generation.

But my point was, is it a valid argument to say that certain child should not be born because it may have (very) difficult life. Consequently, if such child is born anyway, would you be able to point a finger at it and say "it should've never been born"?

Just a moral dilemma for Tuesday evening...

They can use a surrogate for delivery the baby.

It is a valid point, because said child is not a child because it does not exist, plus there are more than enough people on the planet, adoption of an already existing young human being would be the correct thing to do, it is very selfish and primitive thing to do if one's motivation is to pass their own genes.

[TotalShift]

There is a similar cases like this in my place. The mother has health problems and they use another woman from Russia to give birth the child.

[TotalShift]

Stating the obvious is obvious but damn, this woman is gonna be in her late 70s before this kid grows up and gets out of high school - and that's assuming everything goes as planned. I have to believe the kid is going to be teased when his peers either find out about the dynamics here (grandmother had her daughter's kid  ) or that his so-called parents are already in their 70s when everyone else's parents are in their 30s or 40s max. Even if you go the surrogate route, most of my sentiments still apply unless the surrogate plays the roll of mother for real and not pretending that the grandparents are the parents. It'a best if this couple just retires and starts a foundation in memory of their daughter or something.

Oh how I love those ethical/philosophical debates! Just for a sake of discussion:

Is it better if such child is never born, because it won't be teased by other kids and won't be raised by elderly grandparents? Isn't living in tough conditions better than not living at all?

If you don't exist you don't exist, one is not sorrow for not existing...

This child has the right to be born if her mother wishes to. Every child has right to be born. We don't know what will this child become in the future.

[pedrog]

Stating the obvious is obvious but damn, this woman is gonna be in her late 70s before this kid grows up and gets out of high school - and that's assuming everything goes as planned. I have to believe the kid is going to be teased when his peers either find out about the dynamics here (grandmother had her daughter's kid  ) or that his so-called parents are already in their 70s when everyone else's parents are in their 30s or 40s max. Even if you go the surrogate route, most of my sentiments still apply unless the surrogate plays the roll of mother for real and not pretending that the grandparents are the parents. It'a best if this couple just retires and starts a foundation in memory of their daughter or something.

Oh how I love those ethical/philosophical debates! Just for a sake of discussion:

Is it better if such child is never born, because it won't be teased by other kids and won't be raised by elderly grandparents? Isn't living in tough conditions better than not living at all?

If you don't exist you don't exist, one is not sorrow for not existing...

This child has the right to be born if her mother wishes to. Every child has right to be born. We don't know what will this child become in the future.

The child has no rights because the child does not exist!

[pawel7777]

They can use a surrogate for delivery the baby.

You made it sound like is as easy as using a taxi services. But the reality is not always in line with hollywood reality (gay couple use surrogate and all live happily ever after etc). You know there's very strong emotional bond between the child and women who carries it under her heart for 9 months and gives birth?
You know that 'surrogate' can eventually perceive the baby as her own and can simply refuse to give it away? What about breast feeding?

And, as Chief Ramsey mentioned, it doesn't solve the age problem.

It is a valid point, because said child is not a child because it does not exist

I see your point here, but that's a bit of moral short-cut and escaping from discussion. That's not really an answer to "should or shouldn't".
And the question still stands:

if such child is born anyway, would you be able to point a finger at it and say "it should've never been born"?

plus there are more than enough people on the planet, adoption of an already existing young human being would be the correct thing to do, it is very selfish and primitive thing to do if one's motivation is to pass their own genes.

Primitive =/= wrong

It's as primitive as eating, drinking, copulating or providing for your family.

Would you go as far as to say that every couple who decide to have their own children is "selfish" and everyone should adopt instead (until there are no orphans left)?

[pedrog]

They can use a surrogate for delivery the baby.

You made it sound like is as easy as using a taxi services. But the reality is not always in line with hollywood reality (gay couple use surrogate and all live happily ever after etc). You know there's very strong emotional bond between the child and women who carries it under her heart for 9 months and gives birth?
You know that 'surrogate' can eventually perceive the baby as her own and can simply refuse to give it away? What about breast feeding?

Don't know how's the law in UK, but where that option is available these type of questions don't exist.

And, as Chief Ramsey mentioned, it doesn't solve the age problem.

It is a valid point, because said child is not a child because it does not exist

I see your point here, but that's a bit of moral short-cut and escaping from discussion. That's not really an answer to "should or shouldn't".
And the question still stands:

if such child is born anyway, would you be able to point a finger at it and say "it should've never been born"?

This is deviating from the point, the question of who has the right is not on the unborn child but in the woman who wants to get pregnant.

plus there are more than enough people on the planet, adoption of an already existing young human being would be the correct thing to do, it is very selfish and primitive thing to do if one's motivation is to pass their own genes.

Primitive =/= wrong

It's as primitive as eating, drinking, copulating or providing for your family.
Would you go as far as to say that every couple who decide to have their own children is "selfish" and everyone should adopt instead (until there are no orphans left)?

Maybe primitive is not the right word, perhaps primeval is more appropriate, and that's exactly what I defense, not that that should be enforce by law but as the right thing to do.