About me
About me

Children’s author becomes oldest woman to give birth


Hold up! Before you read on, please read this...

This post was published more than 15 years ago

I keep old posts on the site because I often enjoy reading old content on other people's sites. It can be interesting to see how views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have, to put it mildly, mellowed.

I'm not a believer in brushing the past under the carpet. I've written some offensive rubbish on here in the past: deleting it and pretending it never happened doesn't change that. I hope that stumbling across something that's 15 years old won't offend anyone anew, because I hope that people can understand that what I thought and felt and wrote about then is probably very different to what I think and feel and write about now. It's a relic of an (albeit recent) bygone era.

So, given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views may well have changed in the last 15 years. I have written some very silly things over the years, many of which I find utterly cringeworthy today.
  • This post might use words or language in ways which I would now consider highly inappropriate, offensive, embarrassing, or all three.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken, and embedded material might not appear properly.

Okay. Consider yourself duly warned. Read on...

Children’s author becomes oldest woman to give birth (Independent)

I disagree with medical treatment to allow women to give birth after the menopause. There are sound biological reasons for the menopause to occur, and to choose to extend the woman’s reproductive life in this way puts her in danger – it’s a medical intervention that puts a woman at physical risk, of which the best possible outcome is to introduce another child who is likely to be unwell himself, and even if not, will definitely have a mother whose biology determines that they cannot give the best possible care to the child.

Whilst I think it’s wrong to assess someone’s psychological trauma as less important than biological symptoms, I cannot see that the benefits of treatment outweigh the risks.

‘First do no harm’: I think that to act in this case could cause unnecessary harm. And so I’m against this kind of treatment.

This 218th post was filed under: News and Comment.

The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.