The oldest mom in the world gave birth two years ago to twin boys and only recently passed away. Her demise begs the question – was it wise for her to give birth so late in her life?
I believe reproductive rights, whether to have children or not, should be chiefly left in the hands of females. That is, their bodies give them the right to determine and decide what and how they wish to act.
However, as hypocritical as my statement will sound, I do fear for the welfare of those orphaned twin boys now that they have no parents. A father figure was never in the picture as their mom opted for a sperm bank. But now that she is no longer alive, who takes responsibility of those boys?
Obviously if the mother was still alive, then they would be no judgment of her decision to have the children so late in her life, but now that she isn’t, I wonder if she was a tad bit selfish. Of course, she wasn’t aware that she would pass away so soon after giving birth, but a woman in her sixties must have weighed her mortality at one point.
In any case, I wonder how the twin boys will fare now.
1 comment:
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Look at the case of the "octomom" who obviously has mental problems yet she went ahead with in vitro fertilization to produce eight!! kids. Although I firmly believe in reproductive rights for women, I also believe that one has to have the ability (mentally, monetarily, etc) to provide for the children they produce. The monetary aspects is certainly an important aspect. In New York city, when I walk around I am amazed to see the number of young black and hispanic women (more like girls) pushing strollers around. Without the welfare net what would happen to their kids? The responsiblity of parenting seems to be an afterthought nowadays.
Post a Comment