[NancyAshe]

Adoption professionals aren't the only group faced with the question of "how old is too old?" Medical ethicists are also faced with the question when it comes to assisted reproduction. Earlier this year, a Romanian woman gave birth - using donated sperm and eggs - at age 66. Whether it's adoption or infertility services, is there an answer to the question "are you ever too old to become a mother?"

Some feel that an age limit should be set at a point where it's realistic that the parents will live to see the child become an adult; others say any life with loving parents is better than not having that opportunity, regardless of age; some set a specific upper age for a single person, and a combination of ages for a couple (i.e, a couple with combined ages of 130).

Adoption is quite different than assisted reproduction, where older persons may be considering a high-risk pregnancy. Children are adopted at all different ages, under different circumstances. I recall a few years ago the story of a woman in her 70s who was the only parent her foster son had ever known, and she did, indeed, adopt him. Grandparents frequently adopt their grandchildren - for continuity of the family environment, as well as for the legal rights to make future decisions for the child.

Comparing apples with apples, is there an age limit (a number - 40, 50, 60, etc.) at which assisted reproduction and adoption of newborns should not be options because of age? It's a question ethicists haven't been able to agree on... I suspect we won't be able to agree, either.

[LisaCA]

I don't think there should be an age limit, esp. when bparents are selecting paparents. There is an ethical responsibility of parenting, particularly us older folks (we're 43 and 44) to have all our ducks in a row. we have a will, and are working out our trusts, living wills, etc. we have assorted potential godparents lined up worst case scenario, we have a college fund, massive amounts of insurance, etc. also since we're old and our parents are even older (late 70s), we worry about dd not having grandparents in her life. Luckily with our open adoption, we have birthgrandparents who are in their 50s who we hope will be in her life.

it is a very different story now that more folks are older and having children. when I grew up, I was the only one whose parents were in their late 30s when they had me. all my friends parents were in their 40s while mine were in their 50s (and looked it-bad genes). I swore I wouldn't do this-now look at me, a new mom at the age of 43 . there are things that i bring to the table that I didn't have in my 20s, or 30s: I'm more patient, financially stable, and emotionally stable. I've traveled, partied, lived and had tons of fun. staying home with my daughter and missing all those movies, dinners out etc is a privilege and I'm not missing out on anything. we're having a blast .

not sure about assisted reproduction since the life and health of the mother is at stake as well.

[NancyAshe]

Thanks for your thoughtful post. I wish you and your family all the best! The question will probably never get an answer everyone agrees on. I do think though that both adoption professionals and adopting parents need to take that extra step (as you did) to make arrangements, to make sure that each instance is considered separately, and that good counseling is given to both the adopting and placing parents.

All best
Nancy

[MamaTo6]

I am 43 and dh is 41 and we have a lil guy (13 months) and our adoption will be final in a few months. We are adopting through Soc. Ser. in Ontario. To complete the adoption we were required to do all that Lisaca mentioned. We had to have life insurance, wills and God parents incase something were to happen to both of us. Thankfully we already had these things, but just wanted to mention that it was a requirement for us to adopt. Not sure if it was our age or just the rules in general.


Warm Wishes...Teagans Mama

[wenrl]

This is such an interesting question and almost impossible to answer. There are no gaurantees in parenting no matter what the age. My family is blessed with great genes. We look and feel young up into our seventies, eighties and nineties. All of my grandparents lived to almost a hundred and chances are my siblings and I will exceed their ages.

Therefore, I suppose someone with a family history like mine could adopt or give birth at sixty and raise the child well into aldulthood without much worry. My parents had me in their forties and are now in their seventies. They are still as cool or uncool as they ever were and as involved in my life as anyone else's parents.

However, as a new adoptive mom at 30, I still feel that it is important to have a plan, just in case, regardless of age. Anyone can have an accident or a sudden severe health issue. Not that my partner and I sit around and worry about our health or dying, but once our daughter came into our lives, we made wills and designated a caretaker for her just in case. Considering life and death and worst case scenarios is just a responsible part of parenting, in my opinion.

[bellazmama]

On the other hand, my parents had me when they were 39. My father had a debilitating stroke while I was in college and my mother died of pancreatic cancer a few years later. My daughter basically has no grandparents on my side at all as my own grandparents are deceased as well.

People need to think things through very carefully as to what they will be subjecting their children to later in life. What teen or twenty-something wants to plan their parents' funerals? I didn't like it.

I am a staunch opponent of the over-fifty crowd adopting infants and toddlers.

Sarah

[LisaCA]

the problem with opposing all over-fifty adoptions is where do you draw the line? what if the child has no family but a grandparent, can grandparents over fifty adopt the child? what about if one parent is over fifty but the other isn't? If imminent poor health/death is the issue, what about those can prove a genetic predisposition to longevity? what about those who are actually older but physically younger? (my aunt who smoked several packs a day looked and acted like someone in her 50s (at age 70). The doc refused to believe she was really in her 70s. She died in her mid 70s from breast cancer, and up to the last minute was walking several miles a day, traveling around the world). My mom's side of the family frequently lives to their 80s and beyond, usually healthy til they drop. If they can't adopt infants and toddlers, what age children can they adopt? 5? 7? 10? What if you start the adoption process but don't get a placement til you're 51?

if you prohibit over 50 adoptions, there will be fewer children with homes, and this will particularly impact children of color.

my feeling is that a higher planning burden should be placed on these families, but I'm not comfortable ruling outright.

[bellazmama]

While I agree that many variables exist, what I specifically disagree with is someone who, at the age of near fifty or above, BEGINS the adoption process of an infant or toddler.

[kllee4]

I don't believe that there should be age limits at all, for some of the reasons that LisaCA mentioned, as well as others not mentioned. There are always instances where tragedies in life can, do and often will, happen. What about cases in which (as society may see it), a "perfect" young couple in their late twenties decides to adopt or begin fertility treatments and successfully begin a family. Out of nowhere an illness, accident, homicide, etc. occurs with one or both parents being killed, leaving the child without their parents. Should ANY parent decide not to begin a family by whatever means because they fear bad things may happen?

Also, it is a fact of life now that we are living longer, healthier lives than even our parents' generation and are continually aging better and better, the more we know. If loving, nurturing parents of ANY age can afford it and want to have a family, then why not, I say? We can argue that the children of older parents may regret it. But don't most of us have regrets about our childhoods regarding how we were raised. My mother was a wonderfully nurturning woman (my parents were both 18 when they had me) and while my parents provided me with a wonderful life, she was emotionally insecure/immature. Even at the ripe "old" age of 51, she continues to struggle emotionally. I don't think it matters on how young/old a parent is, but the question should be, can they enrich the life of a child?

I think LisaCA, made a good point of saying that with so many children in need of good homes (the majority being children of color), then excluding "older" couples from pursuing an addition to their family in any way, would do these children a great disservice, and, in turn, a disservice to society as well.