Court rules parents too old to raise child

Sunnyisland

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0916/italy.html


A court in Italy has ruled that the 70 and 57-year-old parents of a toddler are too old to raise her and have recommended she be put up for adoption.
Court says 18-month-old girl should be put up for adoption

The 18-month-old girl, known as Viola, was conceived with the help of artificial insemination after the couple's repeated applications to adopt a child were turned down on the basis that they were too old.
Four judges in Turin in northern Italy ruled that "they (the parents) never thought about the fact that their daughter would be orphaned at a very young age, and before that would be forced to care for her elderly parents," the report in La Repubblica newspaper said.
The child is "the fruit of a distorted application of the enormous possibilities offered by genetic progress," they added.
The court also heard that the couple had had problems taking care of the little girl, including a report that "she was kept in the nursery for five days because the mother didn't feel up to having her in the room with her."

The couple were reported to social services by neighbours after they left the infant alone in a car for a few minutes late one evening, and Viola was immediately taken into care.
The judges ruled that librarian Gabriella De Ambrosis, 57, and her retired husband Luigi, 70, were driven by "a narcissistic need to have a child" and showed "indifference with regard to the child's perspective."
The couple, who married in 1990 when Gabrielle was 36 and spent years trying to conceive naturally, are planning to appeal the ruling, their lawyer said.



Do you think this is unfair to the child,unfair to the parents or should people who are a certain age not be allowed to have children,

My opinion is that the child should not be taken of them and they should be allowed to raise the child themselfs.

Liam Byrne

It's the other end of the age scale they need to be sorting out!

antodeco

In fairness though, by the time the child is 18, her mother will only be 77. Most 77 year olds nowadays are generally ok. If the child was 4 at that time, yes, fair enough. The parents may also be considerably wealthy and be able to afford help quite comfortably.

kelle

Maybe there is more to this than what is in the article, but it seems pathetic to remove a child from their parents care just because the child wasn't sleeping in the parents room, and many people leave their child alone in the car for more than just a few minutes without any repurcussions. Here's an old thread from Parenting about that http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055119815

Sounds like they were nitpicked purely because of their ages. I hope they're watching younger parents too - they are not exempt from neglecting their children!

EverEvolving

I don't think they are too old to care for a child, the mother is only 57 and female life expectancy is high enough in Italy. The article makes it look as if there are other mitigating factors but they could be easily explained away, for example not having the child in the room could be temporary baby blues which most mothers experience and leaving the child in the car, while not ok, may have been only for a few minutes.

Gummy Panda

Who wants to raise a kid in their twilight years?

Madness

Sunnyisland

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Who wants to raise a kid in their twilight years?

Madness

Well while its not for all or me Some people dont seem to mind.

Table Top Joe

Surprised how tolerant people are of this,having a child at their age is morally wrong,knowing that you probably wont see your children reach adulthood is f***ed up,there comes a time when you have to say its too late,debatable when exactly that is of course but its well before your 50s and 70s for Christ sake

kelle

Table Top Joe wrote: »

Surprised how tolerant people are of this,having a child at their age is morally wrong,knowing that you probably wont see your children reach adulthood is f***ed up,there comes a time when you have to say its too late,debatable when exactly that is of course but its well before your 50s and 70s for Christ sake

I know a young mother aged 27 with 3 small children who is dying of cancer. Words fail me here...

My friend's mother was 46 when she was born, she is now 87 and sadly failing - but up until last year was in great health, minding her grandchildren and involved in a lot of community work around the town. My own mother was 23 when I was born, sadly died at 58 - at least she got to see us reach adulthood, but I expected to have my mother around a lot longer than my friend!

Of course, that's only 3 examples and maybe generally you're correct. But nobody knows what future is mapped out for them.

Son Of A Vidic

Table Top Joe wrote: »

Surprised how tolerant people are of this,having a child at their age is morally wrong,knowing that you probably wont see your children reach adulthood is f***ed up,

What's more fúcked up are the 'parents' at the opposite end of the age scale. Who have abandoned their parental responsibilities completely. And we as a society end up paying for it in every sense of the word.

Table Top Joe

kelle wrote: »

I know a young mother aged 27 with 3 small children who is dying of cancer. Words fail me here...

My friend's mother was 46 when she was born, she is now 87 and sadly failing - but up until last year was in great health, minding her grandchildren and involved in a lot of community work around the town. My own mother was 23 when I was born, sadly died at 58 - at least she got to see us reach adulthood, but I expected to have my mother around a lot longer than my friend!

Of course, that's only 3 examples and maybe generally you're correct. But nobody knows what future is mapped out for them.

As awful as a 27 year old with 3 kids dying is its not the norm,i see this in very black and white terms,when your too old your too old,the child itself is more important than any need you might have to have one,its a purely selfish act,you cant have everything you want in life,these people having kids in their 50s and beyond disgusts me,they know they more than likely wont be there for weddings,graduations,grandkids etc...

Table Top Joe

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

What's more fúcked up are the 'parents' at the opposite end of the age scale. Who have abandoned their parental responsibilities completely. And we as a society end up paying for it in every sense of the word.

I agree.....but its a different argument to be fair

looksee

Saying 'whatabout' other situations is not an answer to the question being asked. On that basis you could brush any question aside.

I agree that there should be a limit to the age at which a couple can have AI to conceive. A woman's body reaches a stage where it is not reasonable to impose pregnancy on it, and at that stage - post or during menopause - it should not be artificially imposed, not least for the sake of the child.

Biggins

I have to agree with the courts on this.
What RTE is reporting is in all probability, a fraction of information as to the case. I'm quite sure there is a hell of a lot more to this case as the Italian authorities would put a lot of effort into investigations, medical, social welfare and situation reports besides looking at their financial aspects too given their age and what the child would be facing in the coming years, regarding future costs (clothes, food, school/college bills, etc), loss of maternal affections when they die, etc.

I also quite sure the two elderly folk put up a hell of a defense so for the state to win their case - there certainly must have been very strong points on which it was swayed towards the state in winning it.

Son Of A Vidic

Table Top Joe wrote: »

I agree.....but its a different argument to be fair

I was highlighting the hypocrisy, here we have two willing parents who would undoubtedly fulfill their parental responsibilities to the child. Yet judges interfere with their right to do so. It's all a bit Orwellian and Nazi like for my liking.

It's a very slippery slope when such judgments are being made. The potential mum is 57, so going by average Italian female life expectancy, she should be around until she's 79 years old. So 21 years as a mother, certainly gives her adequate time to raise a child to adulthood.

sunflower27

A woman I know fell pregnant (unplanned) at 47.

I don't believe the child should be taken off them.

hondasam

I think the court is right in this case, who helped them have a child in the first place,
The mother is going to be 60 when the child is 4yrs. It was a selfish decision to have a child at their age in the first place.

Karona

I think it's unfair to take the child off them, they are still her parents at the end of the day and weren't doing anything extremely wrong.
What has happened to free will, has it completely gone?

TheDriver

only people who can spell should bring up kids:

Courst rules parents to old to raise child

Son Of A Vidic

Speeding reading can be a bad thing sometimes, I totally missed this when I initially 'flew' through the link......

The court also heard that the couple had had problems taking care of the little girl, including a report that "she was kept in the nursery for five days because the mother didn't feel up to having her in the room with her.

The couple were reported to social services by neighbours after they left the infant alone in a car for a few minutes late one evening, and Viola was immediately taken into care.

It was a little bit worrying to read that, so the judges may indeed have a point. Which reverses my previous opinion based on their inability to care, rather than their age.

Sunnyisland

TheDriver wrote: »

only people who can spell should bring up kids:

Courst rules parents to old to raise child

:o ooops But thankfully my lovely children are raised:)

Saila

kids are for young people, end of.

languagenerd

Hmm. While I don't think it's fair on the child that her parents are older, I'm not sure I agree with the courts either. They're still her parents and putting her for adoption now is depriving her of the 20+ years she could have with them.

But this case should be used to raise the question of artificial insemination. If there's a certain legal age where adoption is not allowed, could this same age be imposed on artificial insemination too?