Monday, May 18, 2009

Does being young make you better?

Okay, there's a 66 year-old pregnant woman. There's controversy. She's too old. She can't do it. Blah, blah, blah.

Have you noticed that you're a 30-something who can't run a mile, but there are 70-somethings running 10K races?

Why is AGE the issue - it should be health! Are you HEALTHY enough to have children. It angers me that a 20 year-old who eats Doritos and drinks Mountain Dew can have a baby because she's young enough, but if a 60 year-old who exercises, eats well, and is financially secure gets pregnant SHE'S the irresponsible one? What?!?!

Yes, that mother won't get to see her grandchildren, but she'll get to raise a child. But what about the 24 year-old single mother living on welfare and raising her three kids by three different daddies. Who's live will be better? The kid who's mom dies when he's in his early twenties, but has a good, safe home and a college education, or the kid lived in a two-bedroom apartment with his sibs, mom, and "uncles" and will have to go to work after high school because college is too expensive and he has to get job to help raise his sibs.

Yes, I used extremes here to make my point. Not ALL 60 year-old women are like that; neither are all 24 year-old mothers. But THAT is my point. You can't tell ANYTHING about a person by their age - other than when they were born.

And I'm just going to point out THIS sexual inequality - how old was Larry King when his last child was born? If we're going to tell women they can't have babies past a certain age then we damn well better give every man a vasectomy at the same time...we wouldn't want them to grow up without a father.

Let's stop being so superficial folks. Granted I don't want to have a kid when I'm that old, and I'm not really promoting or encouraging it, but just pointing out that saying you're a WOMAN and you're OLD are two really bad reasons to say you aren't qualified to have kids.

Okay, I'm done.

1 comment:

robin said...

It's an interesting point, and one I hadn't thought of before. I have to admit that my initial reaction was "60? That's WAY too old." That being said, you make a good argument that that view is basically agism. The only defense I have for it is knowing that the age of the mother makes a HUGE difference in the potential health (or health problems) of the child. Even at 30, I'm starting to think that I need to jump on the pregnancy bandwagon, for the health of future children. However, it should also be noted that recent research indicates that the age of the FATHER also comes into play re: the health of the child. So, it is a double-standard - although I personally think that it's pretty gross when a man over 50 procreates for the first time - but mostly because it indicates he's some skeez who's married to/hooked up with some 20-30 year old woman.