How old is too old to have a baby?

Are the reproductive choices of other people any our business? Photo / 123RF

The 65-year-old teacher pregnant with quadruplets has unsurprisingly created a furore. In a world in which a pregnant woman over the age of 34 can sometimes be deemed an elderly primigravida, the medical profession clearly needs to devise a term for senior citizens in possession of a baby bump.

De Duitse Annegret Raunigk is zwanger van een vierling. Raunigk is 65 en heeft al 13 kinderen http://t.co/1UHBcgVu6q pic.twitter.com/HqnjjL5KeQ

— RTL Nieuws (@RTLnieuws) April 12, 2015

This German woman's pregnancy, which has attracted widespread criticism, is the result of artificial insemination using both donated sperm and eggs. The head of obstetrics at the University of Leipzig said: "Any pregnancy of a woman over age 45 has to be considered a high-risk pregnancy; over 60 this is naturally extreme."

Some people would no doubt say it's extremely unnatural as well.

That was certainly the view of fashion designers Dolce & Gabbana when they called IVF babies "synthetic". This raised the ire of Elton John - who has two IVF children and, incidentally, happens to be no spring chicken himself. He called for a boycott of the fashion label and said that IVF is "a miracle that has allowed legions of loving people, both straight and gay, to fulfil their dream of having children."

David Furnish, Elijah Furnish-John, Zachary Furnish-John, and Sir Elton John. Photo / Getty

He's right about the "legions". More than 5-million IVF children have been born since Louise Brown entered the world in 1978. Back then we called them "test-tube babies".

This reproductive technology has given birth to many a heart-warming story. There is the one about the "IVF mum" who fell in love with her anonymous sperm donor after the baby was born. He's a cattle famer, they're engaged to be married and a movie might be in the offing. Aw.

Then there is the one about the woman who, thanks to surrogacy, became a mother at the age of 57. You would surely have to be a callous sort to want to diminish her joy in having her "overwhelming" desire for a baby met. It came at a significant financial and emotional cost.

Back in the day when laboratory-made babies were just a glint in some scientist's eye I think the belief was that this technology would be used to assist couples with fertility issues. Of course, as well as achieving this goal, 40 years on IVF has been used to democratise parenthood in ways most of us would never have imagined. Now single women, gay male couples and women well past their naturally fertile years can have children through the power of assisted fertility.

The technology may be cutting-edge but old-time attitudes prevail. A lot of people think that those who are single, gay, old or all of the above have no business procreating. Often the reasons are quasi-religious. "A baby needs a mother and a father" covers most bases while questions about mortality and general fitness are targeted towards those expecting children later in life.

So do I think that 65 is too old? I guess I do but it's probably less about the woman herself and more because I consider myself "too old" for having babies and I'm "only" 50.

But are the reproductive choices of other people any of my business? Not really.

So it's only fair that the last word should go to the woman at the centre of the controversy.

"How does one have to behave at 65?" she asked.

Her rhetorical question revealed an attitude that makes you think that if any senior citizen can handle four newborns at once it just might be her.