Celine Dion- IVF taken too far?

Shelga

Just read this about Celine Dion, didn't know she was pregnant again.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101018/ap_en_mu/us_people_celine_dion

Just got me thinking about women having babies later in life- is it a good idea, bad idea, somewhere in between?

I'm only 23, but ideally would like to have kids in the next 10 years so as to minimise risks and complications, and so I can run around playing with them, relate to them as they grow up, etc.

I'm fully aware that life doesn't always work out as planned, and sometimes having your first child at 35+ is just the way it goes, but is undergoing multiple cycles of IVF at age 42 an abuse of the technology? Is it ethical? Reading about Celine Dion putting her body through 6 cycles of IVF and a miscarriage at age 42 just makes me feel a little uneasy. The fact that her husband is 68 then makes me think that what she is doing also has a selfish side to it.

Sure, you could argue that anyone who wants kids ultimately does it for selfish reasons, but has she gone too far? The vast majority of people would not have the financial means to go through similar medical treatment.

I suppose I just feel that there comes a time when you have to stop fighting nature... thoughts?

Xiney

42 isn't a ridiculous age for IVF (although everything about Celine Dion is a bad idea at any age)

I think if she were a normal woman (as opposed to a superstar whose kids will never lead a normal life anyway) and she were undergoing IVF at the age of say, 50+ then I might give pause... but after all, people have free will and will make their own choices.

LizT

Shelga wrote: »

Just read this about Celine Dion, didn't know she was pregnant again.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101018/ap_en_mu/us_people_celine_dion

Just got me thinking about women having babies later in life- is it a good idea, bad idea, somewhere in between?

I'm only 23, but ideally would like to have kids in the next 10 years so as to minimise risks and complications, and so I can run around playing with them, relate to them as they grow up, etc.

I'm fully aware that life doesn't always work out as planned, and sometimes having your first child at 35+ is just the way it goes, but is undergoing multiple cycles of IVF at age 42 an abuse of the technology? Is it ethical? Reading about Celine Dion putting her body through 6 cycles of IVF and a miscarriage at age 42 just makes me feel a little uneasy. The fact that her husband is 68 then makes me think that what she is doing also has a selfish side to it.

Sure, you could argue that anyone who wants kids ultimately does it for selfish reasons, but has she gone too far? The vast majority of people would not have the financial means to go through similar medical treatment.

I suppose I just feel that there comes a time when you have to stop fighting nature... thoughts?

My mum was 37 when she had my sister, 39 when she had me and 41 when she had my brother. My dad was 55 when my sis was born, 57 when I was born and 59 when my bro was born. I can relate to both my parents very well and I have a great relationship with both of them. Sometimes age is just a number. My parents were settled and very financially and emotionally stable. Both my parents are great at being parents and although both myself and my siblings were born naturally, I would like to think that if we hadn't been, my parents would have gone the IVF route and been able to have a child.

Some people aren't in a place where they can have children until later in life - I don't think age should factor in.

Neyite

lizt wrote: »

My mum was 37 when she had my sister, 39 when she had me and 41 when she had my brother. My dad was 55 when my sis was born, 57 when I was born and 59 when my bro was born. I can relate to both my parents very well and I have a great relationship with both of them. Sometimes age is just a number. My parents were settled and very financially and emotionally stable. Both my parents are great at being parents and although both myself and my siblings were born naturally, I would like to think that if we hadn't been, my parents would have gone the IVF route and been able to have a child.

Some people aren't in a place where they can have children until later in life - I don't think age should factor in.

i agree, i come from a similar background myself - my gran was 42 with her last one, so 42, is fine with me, but over 50 or post menapausal women, then i do think its a bit much. i felt so sad for the twins in spain a couple of years ago born to a woman who was 66 when she left them motherless about 2 years later. now thats way too old in my opinion.

if i recall, didnt Celine dion have IVF for her son too - she had 6 years of trying naturally then IVF with him. he is 9 or 10 now, so she would only have been 24/25 when she started trying for her family. thats not old at all.

by all accounts, IVF is not for the faint hearted. its a gruelling process, so i wonder did she initially say enough was enough when she had the one, but as time went by she might have been ready to try again?

i hope it goes well for her, shes had a long road with her babies.

ztoical

Shelga wrote: »

Sure, you could argue that anyone who wants kids ultimately does it for selfish reasons, but has she gone too far? The vast majority of people would not have the financial means to go through similar medical treatment.

I suppose I just feel that there comes a time when you have to stop fighting nature... thoughts?

the Octomom was on welfare with 6 kids already and had 8 more babies with no means to support them. Dion having twins when she has one other child is hardly a massive abuse of IVF.

She had her first child with IVF over 9 years ago when she would have been in her early 30's so it might not be age but health reasons for the IVF - her husband had cancer which might have effected a pregnancy.

Nervous Wreck

Wait, so because not everyone would have the cash to undergo multiple sessions of IVF, Celine Dion is unethically abusing technology? The more probably conclusion is that it was a slow-ass news day for yahoo, I reckon.

Posy

Neyite wrote: »

i felt so sad for the twins in spain a couple of years ago born to a woman who was 66 when she left them motherless about 2 years later. now thats way too old in my opinion.

But then someone like Jade Goody has two children when she's in her early twenties and dies age 27 leaving her children motherless, so you can never tell what will happen.
BTW, I'm not disagreeing with your point, I do think 66 (or anything over 50, in my humble opinion) is way too old to be having IVF. :eek:

candy-gal1

I never understand this, If someone wants to, and can safely, have a baby at 50 then i dont see a problem with it. if thats what you want. If this wasnt seen as such a bad thing to do then there would probably be a lot less 20 somethings wanting to get pregnant because its seen as the "done thing" imho.

bubbaloo

There are many reasons that women have children later in life and many reasons for opting for IVF.
Some women don't meet their partner until later in life but for a lot of women the path to motherhood is anything but easy.
Some women go to hell and back to try to have a baby and if IVF offers them a glimmer of hope then why not?
I wouldn't wish fertility problems on you or anyone else for that matter, but if you ever have experience of it you will understand what you would sacrifice to have a baby.
The yearning for a child is all-consuming and a woman in that situation would literally go through anything and give up everything she has to have a baby.
So my opinion is no, it is not an abuse of technology - it is a woman of 41 years of age who has tried to have a baby and IVF offered her the possibility of making her dream come true.

Stheno

I've two friends, one who is 40 and one who is 42, both undergoing IVF treatment at the moment

I see nothing wrong with it, in the case of both my friends, they have tried for years to have children and have been undergoing treatment/tests/operations for several years also.

panda100

Shelga wrote: »

I'm only 23, but ideally would like to have kids in the next 10 years so as to minimise risks and complications, and so I can run around playing with them, relate to them as they grow up, etc.

You may feel differently when your a bit older and things don't actually pan out the way you want.

Shelga

I've been thinking about it more, and I think it's the fact that her husband is 68 and not in the best of health that adds to my unease about the situation. And I never said IVF is bad; I think it's a great development that gives hope to many women- who knows, maybe I'll need it myself some day.

But should fertility doctors let a woman undergo as many cycles as she wants, as long as she has the money to pay for it? What about her emotional and mental wellbeing?

panda100

Shelga wrote: »

But should fertility doctors let a woman undergo as many cycles as she wants, as long as she has the money to pay for it? What about her emotional and mental wellbeing?

You do raise a valid point in that IVF has a small success rate, I think its something like only 25% conceive after the treatment?
Its a very intrusive and expensive procedure for something that has very little gain,but I guess its up to the individual to take that risk.

Shelga

panda100 wrote: »

You may feel differently when your a bit older and things don't actually pan out the way you want.

I then said in my next sentence that I was fully aware that this may not happen; I do realise it's best case scenario. Topics like this always seem to get people's backs up, and things are easily misconstrued. Perhaps I should have left my age out of it.

All I said was allowing a couple with an average age of 55 to undergo multiple cycles of IVF when the woman has already suffered the pain of a miscarriage just doesn't seem right to me; I think that's a perfectly valid opinion.

bubbaloo

Shelga wrote: »

Topics like this always seem to get people's backs up, and things are easily misconstrued. Perhaps I should have left my age out of it.

All I said was allowing a couple with an average age of 55 to undergo multiple cycles of IVF when the woman has already suffered the pain of a miscarriage just doesn't seem right to me; I think that's a perfectly valid opinion.

Of course topics like this get people's backs up. There is an awful lot of emotion involved. Tbh your age is somewhat irrelevant in that I would have the same response to your question regardless of your age. But by putting your age in your post you invited comments on your maturity. Women who have experience of fertility treatment are - generally speaking - older than you, so they will feel that you don't know what you're talking about.

I understand your question but as you can see from my comments above, I believe that a woman in this situation will do anything to have a child and it does not matter to her what any doctor says - she will keep trying!

ztoical

Shelga wrote: »

But should fertility doctors let a woman undergo as many cycles as she wants, as long as she has the money to pay for it? What about her emotional and mental wellbeing?

There are ethics involved and doctors can and have had their medical licences revoked if it is dimmed they aren't acting in the best interest of their patient. Yes if you have the money you can most likely find someone somewhere who will do it but this is a high profile figure and no were in the any news pieces has it been hinted she has done anything out of the ordinary [flown to a different country, gone to see a doctor with a rep etc] Her husband has had cancer and other health issues but he's not dead yet and she's had no reported health issues other then fertility issues, she's only 42 and her kids would be well looked after if something did happen to either of them. Like I said in an earlier post I think the case of Nadya Suleman having 8 babies when she already had 6 kids, no money and limited support [no partner and her aging parents] is a clearer abuse of IVF.

Plenty of women have several miscarraiges without going through IVF, my mum had something like 6 between me and my brother, yet she kept trying regardless of the heavy emotional toil it was taking on her so I don't see how it's much different to doing several attempts via IVF [other then cost]. The women doing it are more then aware of the emotional weight its going to have on them.

Is it right or fair that someone with money can have medically treatment that not everyone who'd like it can have? We could argue all day about that but the fact is it's a luxury that money offers you. There are plenty of cases of people who can afford it flying to see the best doctors, getting the best equipement and best treatment and not being stuck on lists for years to be seen etc If she was really throwing her money around she'd just rent someones womb for the 9 months rather then put herself through several rounds of IVF.

Audie

Shelga wrote: »

Just read this about Celine Dion, didn't know she was pregnant again.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101018/ap_en_mu/us_people_celine_dion

Just got me thinking about women having babies later in life- is it a good idea, bad idea, somewhere in between?

I'm only 23, but ideally would like to have kids in the next 10 years so as to minimise risks and complications, and so I can run around playing with them, relate to them as they grow up, etc.

I'm fully aware that life doesn't always work out as planned, and sometimes having your first child at 35+ is just the way it goes, but is undergoing multiple cycles of IVF at age 42 an abuse of the technology? Is it ethical? Reading about Celine Dion putting her body through 6 cycles of IVF and a miscarriage at age 42 just makes me feel a little uneasy. The fact that her husband is 68 then makes me think that what she is doing also has a selfish side to it.

Sure, you could argue that anyone who wants kids ultimately does it for selfish reasons, but has she gone too far? The vast majority of people would not have the financial means to go through similar medical treatment.

I suppose I just feel that there comes a time when you have to stop fighting nature... thoughts?

Shelga, I do agree with the point you're making. I think there are a lot of things to be considered when having a baby over 40/45.. not sure what age celine dion is! And I think ideally women should be having children younger than this. (Recognising that things are rarely ideal blah blah!) However, as gently as you try to make your point, people will get really pissed off about this topic, as i've found out here in the past! There won't be a balanced argument, so I'm not going to bother in this particular case!

Das Kitty

Personally I don't think anyone can judge having not been in that situation.

Asphyxia

I don't see a problem wrong with it either but in my own view I would be terrified having my first child at 42 with all the risks involved :eek:

Neyite

panda100 wrote: »

You do raise a valid point in that IVF has a small success rate, I think its something like only 25% conceive after the treatment?
Its a very intrusive and expensive procedure for something that has very little gain,but I guess its up to the individual to take that risk.

That 25% is damn good odds if you have been years trying and just getting a big 0% so i would look at that as a great gain if it worked

all the poking and prodding, drugs and needles are not life threatening as such, but mostly discomfort, some pain, some embarrassment, and the drugs do make your body go a bit loopers. the major risks are the gruelling emotional ones to the couple and their relationship.

It really bothers me when people judge and criticise the use of IVF. I don't know why, but it's always young people who assume they'll get pregnant no bother, or women with children who got pregnant no bother. I don't see anything ridiculous about having a baby at 42, it's not even that old. Loads of women conceive naturally at that age. Now, for older women you could argue that it's selfish, as there's a good chance they won't live too long, but I don't see how that's relevant to Celine Dion. Don't see how her previous miscarriages are relevant either. She's chosen to keep trying, it's her own business. I also don't see what her celebrity has to do with anything, she's hardly the most showbizzy type, is she? How often do you see pictures of her son? Some people on here don't seem to be aware that she has a son. Hardly a stage mother.

echosound

I don't see any problem with medical intervention such as IUI/IVF/ICSI to help a couple get pregnant, for me the only limiting factor WRT age would be I personally think that the approximate upper age limit (for myself) would be the age at which an average woman would not be able to conceive naturally - i.e. 48ish would be my cutoff point, as I've personally known women who conceived naturally and gave birth right up til that age. My own husband's mother gave birth to him when she was in her mid-40s.

Shelga wrote: »

All I said was allowing a couple with an average age of 55 to undergo multiple cycles of IVF when the woman has already suffered the pain of a miscarriage just doesn't seem right to me; I think that's a perfectly valid opinion.

Speaking as someone who has fertility issues, who took fertility drugs and underwent invasive procedures and operations (although not IVF as of yet), who managed to conceive just once in 5 years and then went through a traumatic miscarriage at the beginning of the second trimester - if a doctor turned round to me and said "I will not agree to you undergoing any further fertility treatment because you have already suffered the pain of a miscarriage", I imagine my reaction would be violent TBH.

I know what the pain of a miscarriage is like, especially when tied to fertility problems and trying for a family for years without success. As Ztoical has mentioned, plenty of regular fertile women go through multiple miscarriages and decide to keep trying, knowing the emotional toll it may take. How is it different to someone going through cycles of IVF and having miscarriages and deciding to keep trying?

Shelga

Personally I do not assume I'll "get pregnant no bother". I repeatedly said that is just an ideal scenario. All I was hoping to do was begin a discussion on the benefits/drawbacks of IVF, and whether certain limitations should be put on its use.

It seems people would rather base any decisions on the future of how IVF usage is regulated on their own emotional response, which I believe is foolish and will lead to more pain long-term. But then, I'm just a silly little girl who doesn't know anything, despite the fact that users here have no idea of my own medical history. Seems I am not the only one making assumptions.

Anyway Audie was right, there seems to be little point discussing such a topic here as people don't seem to want to be objective. Sorry if I have offended anyone; truly that was not my intent.

CathyMoran

I do agree that the trauma of miscarriages put a lot of strain on the parents - having gone through multiple miscarriages before I had our son who is 29 weeks old. I am now about 7 weeks pregnant again and the strain of not knowing if this one is OK is huge for both of us. But I am 36 now and my mother had the menopause at 40 so time is not a friend.

I do feel that the father in Celine Dion's case is a bit old but who am I to judge, women beyond 50 having IVF is another issue though...

How Strange

Op, it's onky when you decide to start down the path of trying to get pregnant that the fear of infertility becomes real. Every month you wait for your period so you have two weeks of thinking what if.

When we started we discussed limits if fertility was a problem and we agreed that ivf wasn't an option for us. I made him promise that no matter what happened he'd have to remind me of what we agreed. I've absolutely no ethical or moral problem with ivf; I think it's a god send to many desperate people who want kids but a) we couldn't afford it and b) our relationship is too important to me to risk the need for a baby becoming all consuming.

I don't know how I would've reacted if we'd had fertility issues because we were one of the very lucky couples. I may have begged, pleaded, kicked and screamed to get ivf. I sincerely hope I never have find out.

It's a highly emotive and deeply personal issue so there will never be consensus. It's not at all foolish to have an opinion based on emotion; surely your own opinion is based on your own personal view that over 42 is too old and repeated ivf treatment is unethical. Do you have a medical basis for your opinion?

As the saying goes 'walk a mile in my shoes' and then perhaps you might see it differently.

seenitall

Shelga wrote: »

Personally I do not assume I'll "get pregnant no bother". I repeatedly said that is just an ideal scenario. All I was hoping to do was begin a discussion on the benefits/drawbacks of IVF, and whether certain limitations should be put on its use.

It seems people would rather base any decisions on the future of how IVF usage is regulated on their own emotional response, which I believe is foolish and will lead to more pain long-term. But then, I'm just a silly little girl who doesn't know anything, despite the fact that users here have no idea of my own medical history. Seems I am not the only one making assumptions.

Anyway Audie was right, there seems to be little point discussing such a topic here as people don't seem to want to be objective. Sorry if I have offended anyone; truly that was not my intent.

OP, I think you are being needlessley judgmental toward older mothers, and your views on IVF are just not realistic. IVF is there to help conception; the older the mother, the more difficult the conception, therefore it follows that the older mothers are the ones who are turning to it the most, and will continue to do so, no matter what anyone else thinks of it.

AFAIK, there is already a cap on IVF in UK (for example) somewhere in women's forties, but the ones that are older and can afford it are just turning to going to India or similar, where there is no compunction at all about a woman's age. So this whole debate you started is a bit rhetorical and irrelavant, really. We are already seeing ever older mothers-to-be in the Western world, and this trend is set to comfortably continue as the IVF techniques make more advances in the coming years.

THAT's a non-emotional response!

Giselle

CathyMoran wrote: »

I do agree that the trauma of miscarriages put a lot of strain on the parents - having gone through multiple miscarriages before I had our son who is 29 weeks old. I am now about 7 weeks pregnant again and the strain of not knowing if this one is OK is huge for both of us. But I am 36 now and my mother had the menopause at 40 so time is not a friend.

I do feel that the father in Celine Dion's case is a bit old but who am I to judge, women beyond 50 having IVF is another issue though...

Best of luck Cathy.:)

OP, I think it might be presumptous to assume the Doc knows better than the woman how much her emotional resolve can carry her through. Surely she's the best judge of how much is too much? I dearly hope I'm never in the position of having to find out the hard way, but none of us knows until we try how hard or easy concieving will be.

I think 42 is still young enough in terms of motherhood, but I feel over 50 is just a little too far. Perhaps we're just programmed to accept that menopause is the end of fertility for good reason.

Shelga

Shelga wrote: »

Personally I do not assume I'll "get pregnant no bother". I repeatedly said that is just an ideal scenario. All I was hoping to do was begin a discussion on the benefits/drawbacks of IVF, and whether certain limitations should be put on its use.

It seems people would rather base any decisions on the future of how IVF usage is regulated on their own emotional response, which I believe is foolish and will lead to more pain long-term. But then, I'm just a silly little girl who doesn't know anything, despite the fact that users here have no idea of my own medical history. Seems I am not the only one making assumptions.

Anyway Audie was right, there seems to be little point discussing such a topic here as people don't seem to want to be objective. Sorry if I have offended anyone; truly that was not my intent.

Nobody said you were a silly little girl. But I just don't get why you're even asking the question you asked in the OP. I don't understand why it would be anyone's business how many IVF cycles or miscarriages Celine Dion has had. Again, she's not even that old. I do get the point about the husband being really old, but plenty of men father children well into their sixties. I suppose I took exception to the rather judgemental tone of your post - why should a third party tell a woman like Celine that she can't undergo more IVF treatments? She can well afford it and she's the one who has to go through all the pain and stress. She obviously thinks it's worth it. I dunno, when I hear stories like this, I just put myself in the person's shoes. If I were absolutely desperate for a child and couldn't conceive naturally, I'd sure as hell be doing anything and everything I could.

ztoical

Trying to have a non-emotional discussion about IVF is like trying to have a non-emotional discussion about abortion, it's just not going to happen because at the end of the day it is a very personal issue. I have no interest in having kids and if a doctor turned around tomorrow and told me I was unable to have any it wouldn't bother me at all but I know enough people that it would shocking news for so for the most part I don't become involved in something that frankly I just can't relate to.

The original post seemed very focused on Dion's case and the age and money side of things and it may just be that it was too focused on one case and worded wrongly to get the kind of discussion going that OP might have been looking for.

The fact is IVF is offered via most countries health care systems [at least the countries that have them] but the lists are long and there are plenty of women who've taken massive loans, sold cars/property etc to pay for private IVF I don't think you should judge some like Dion because she has the money to pay for IVF without going broke or waiting years on a list. Alot of women going through IVF are older for the simple reason that young healthy people don't need IVF, most young women who have IVF found out early in their lives that they had some health reason that would make it difficult to have a baby on their own. For the majority of women they do wait a little later in their lives to start trying, then they will spend a year if not more going the old fashion road before figuring something is wrong then they have to spend several months going through tests to find out why it's not working before finally going the IVF road, all of this adds years on to the process.

In Dion's case she clearly started trying in her 20's for her first child and found out she had a health reason that meant going with IVF, not everyone wants to have a second child right after the first so they waited a few years and then her husband was ill so they may have opted to wait until his health was better. Her case is certainly not an example of abuse of IVF.

With regards to her husbands age what about the couples who freeze the man's sperm due to him having an illness and the wife has the baby after he dies? Surely that is open to a bigger ethtics discussion then a living father of 60+?