[Tassium]

Would a couple aged 65/50 of normal income be allowed to adopt a child in California?

And if so why so.

65/50 is just far too old. What sort of child protection is there in the USA that they allow an old couple to adopt.


Elton John/David Furnish are treating a human being like some kind of puppy.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by lexi22

Ah no, the funniest bit was when it got a bit too windy one night and he rang his manager in London to ask him to make it stop.

Don't remember that, but I hope he's not like that now!

[Osusana]

Originally Posted by louise1966

I think the consensus is that have money, can have anything! There are at least two issues in question re the Elton John parenting situation. Firstly, I would just like to clearly state that homophobia is a horrible choice of attitude to have and should not be tolerated. My deceased brother was gay, and always said that he believed that his sexuality/lifestyle dictated that he would never have children, but that was his choice. Had he been heterosexual, he said, he would definitely have had a family. I concur 100%; a child ought not to be raised by two gay parents, male or female, it does not provide the equilibrium required to evolve into a stable, well-balanced individual. Then there is the inevitable teasing by other children and possible ostracisation. Secondly, should a celebrity be able to buy a baby just because he/she can afford to do so? I do not dispute the fact that any child sired and raised by Sir Elton and David will want for nothing, financially, but everyone should start the process of becoming parents on an equal footing. How many couples acquire serious debt just to be able to embark upon IVF treatment? I wish them both, their son and the child they are expecting, all the best for the future, in the hope that the outcome is positive but it is, imo, a potential recipe for disaster. If one fast forwards 16 years or so, one can see the children being engulfed by a hedonistic lifestyle one would wish on no individual.

Well thought out post, agree 100%
I would say the same about any couple over the ages of 50 who want to have a child - nature says no and being able to afford to cheat nature is just wrong. Just my opinion.

[missfrankiecat]

Originally Posted by lexi22

Actually, no. I think Elton was a big selfish self-involved baby himself until relatively recently. He has more or less said this about himself in interviews over the years. Surely it's good that he didn't go down that route until he gained 'maturity' himself?

I just see two really happy people thrilled to bits with late fatherhood.

I don't think, bless him, that Elton's behaviour has matured all that much recently - try reading the reviews from people at various shows in Las Vegas last year when he threw tantrums, cut short performances etc or listen to his foul mouthed rant against Madonna by way of example. The big step forward was about 15 - 20 years ago when he got most of his addictions under control to his enormous credit (and possibly David's too!) but his oft witnessed public behaviour with fans and within the industry suggest he remains an unpredicatable egotist who considers his wants and needs override other people's. In itself, that is nothing to do with him being a parent - it's a common problem with supremely talented entertainers who have had their every whim pandered to all their lives and I would be the last person to suggest they are not, all things being equal, capable of being adequate parents (especially if the other parent is able to compensate). But to suggest that Elton is in some way a fundamentally 'reformed' or different character from when he was a young or even middle aged man is simply ignoring the facts as we are aware of them.

[DiamondDoll]

My husband was fifty when our first child was born.
Age is only a number and my eldest child had his love for nineteen years.
Do not dare sit in judgement because none of us know what tomorrow might bring.

[Osusana]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

They sound very close to their surrogate and have used the same lady again.

A question for the FM's posting bile - just how do you expect two gay men to have children? Ask The Stork? Make a wish and look in the cabbage patch/gooseberry bush?

Or is it just that you don't like the idea of gay men becoming parents?

In answer to your last sentence - not at all.
I expect a gay couple (male or female) to consider the needs of the child rather than their own desires. How they get a baby is irrelevant to me, it's the age that I have a problem with.
Consigning a child to never have the chance of a grandparent or for that child to not have grandparents for their children is cruel in my opinion

[missfrankiecat]

Originally Posted by lexi22

Exactly. They waited until they felt the time was right for them. How that makes them selfish and self-indulgent is a bit of a mystery.

Anyhoo...

In my book because an unselfish person would consider what is right for a child not themselves! The definition of selfish I understand involves behaviour that puts the self's needs/wants/rights before other peoples (especially those who have no say in the matter).

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by Osusana

In answer to your last sentence - not at all.
I expect a gay couple (male or female) to consider the needs of the child rather than their own desires. How they get a baby is irrelevant to me, it's the age that I have a problem with.
Consigning a child to never have the chance of a grandparent or for that child to not have grandparents for their children is cruel in my opinion

To quote my mum and her mum before her, 'Tomorrow isn't promised to any of us'.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by Osusana

In answer to your last sentence - not at all.
I expect a gay couple (male or female) to consider the needs of the child rather than their own desires. How they get a baby is irrelevant to me, it's the age that I have a problem with.
Consigning a child to never have the chance of a grandparent or for that child to not have grandparents for their children is cruel in my opinion

Just how do you know they haven't thought about the child's needs? And why will the child not have grandparents? What an odd thing to say! AFAIK Elton's mother is still alive, and perhaps David's parents are too. From what I've read Elton's childhood sounds pretty horrible, so I'm sure he'll be determined to make sure his children have one that's far better.

[Natgar]

Originally Posted by Osusana

Well thought out post, agree 100%
I would say the same about any couple over the ages of 50 who want to have a child - nature says no and being able to afford to cheat nature is just wrong. Just my opinion.

But by that argument IVF should be banned as thats a definite NO by nature. If people can have IVF then gay couples can have surrogates to have kids. Its only fair and as far as age is concerned there are enough women out there having kids at older ages again using IVF.

[Natgar]

Originally Posted by Osusana

In answer to your last sentence - not at all.
I expect a gay couple (male or female) to consider the needs of the child rather than their own desires. How they get a baby is irrelevant to me, it's the age that I have a problem with.
Consigning a child to never have the chance of a grandparent or for that child to not have grandparents for their children is cruel in my opinion

So nobody who has no parents can have children? A bit harsh its bad enough being an orphan

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by missfrankiecat

In my book because an unselfish person would consider what is right for a child not themselves! The definition of selfish I understand involves behaviour that puts the self's needs/wants/rights before other peoples (especially those who have no say in the matter).

And I suppose you have an intimate knowledge of what Elton and David are thinking? If they want a child, and have love to give, why not have one?

In your opinion how will the child be deprived of either love or material things?

[lexi22]

Originally Posted by missfrankiecat

I don't think, bless him, that Elton's behaviour has matured all that much recently - try reading the reviews from people at various shows in Las Vegas last year when he threw tantrums, cut short performances etc or listen to his foul mouthed rant against Madonna by way of example. The big step forward was about 15 - 20 years ago when he got most of his addictions under control to his enormous credit (and possibly David's too!) but his oft witnessed public behaviour with fans and within the industry suggest he remains an unpredicatable egotist who considers his wants and needs override other people's. In itself, that is nothing to do with him being a parent - it's a common problem with supremely talented entertainers who have had their every whim pandered to all their lives and I would be the last person to suggest they are not, all things being equal, capable of being adequate parents (especially if the other parent is able to compensate). But to suggest that Elton is in some way a fundamentally 'reformed' or different character from when he was a young or even middle aged man is simply ignoring the facts as we are aware of them.

I'm not disagreeing with a lot of the above as far as Elton himself is concerned (he IS a hissy-fitter and I don't see that changing, I think it's very much part and parcel of who he is) but it also doesn't mean that he hasn't grown up in other ways and is not a good, conscientious and responsible father. And really, Madonna is just as much a self-involved hissy-fitter as Elton but I also think she's shown herself to be a good conscientious mother so... really, your points are moot, no?

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by lexi22

I'm not disagreeing with a lot of the above as far as Elton himself is concerned (he IS a hissy-fitter and I don't see that changing, I think it's very much part and parcel of who he is) but it also doesn't mean that he hasn't grown up in other ways and is not a good, conscientious and responsible father. And really, Madonna is just as much a self-involved hissy-fitter as Elton but I also think she's shown herself to be a good conscientious mother so... really, your points are moot, no?

He's definitely a hissy-fitter of the first order, but as long as his children aren't subjected to that behaviour, there's nothing wrong. David seems a very level headed bloke, so I'm sure that Elton's diva-ish behaviour is balanced out by his relative normality.

[Osusana]

Originally Posted by Natgar

But by that argument IVF should be banned as thats a definite NO by nature. If people can have IVF then gay couples can have surrogates to have kids. Its only fair and as far as age is concerned there are enough women out there having kids at older ages again using IVF.

I never said that gay couples cannot use surrogates, the mother is likely BY NATURE to be younger and fertile!
Actually I don't agree with IVF being available on the NHS except in certain circumstances, but that's a whole different thread........

Originally Posted by Natgar

So nobody who has no parents can have children? A bit harsh its bad enough being an orphan

Did I actually say that?
Of course grandparents are not guaranteed but with elderly parents, it is much less likely that a child will ever know more than one generation

[The Prumeister]

re - the age debate.

Anyone can die at any point; I think we all have examples of young people who have become parents and subsequently died soon after - so there are (of course) never any guarantees.

That aside, the fact remains that the older you get, the higher your chance of death. If Elton was 80 (which he will be in 15 years), and was embarking on this, would you seriously think that was right? He might indeed get to 80 and want a 3rd child - which he will have the money to acquire. Should it be de rigeur for anyone - no matter what their age, to be able to acquire children through whatever means necessary? An 85 year old woman who has always regretted not having kids deciding to adopt or use a surrogate? Is that fair on the child?

I think Elton & David (like many celebrities) are using the child(ren) as pets.. I can imagine Elton in his silk smoking jacket looking at a website and squealing when he sees an ickle baby that takes his fancy. As I said before, having children is a privilege and not a right (IMHO) and age should be taken into account.

Sexuality is irrelevant.

[missfrankiecat]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

And I suppose you have an intimate knowledge of what Elton and David are thinking? If they want a child, and have love to give, why not have one?

In your opinion how will the child be deprived of either love or material things?

I don't have any more intimate knowledge of Elton and David's thoughts than you. Obviously they want a child and think they will love him or her - I just don't think that is the question we as a society should be asking when sanctioning the renting of wombs for money to buy babies. I think we should have regard to a child's needs and welfare through out his/her minority. We have rules in this country for the maximum age when couples or individuals, gay or straight, are permitted to adopt or, in the case of IVF, become mothers. They are not designed arbitrarily but because a child needs love, not just expressed as passing sentimentality, but in selfless care through infancy and adolescence, stability and boundaries. Of course, some parents die young or become ill but statistically, the chances of losing a parent at psychologically significant ages are massively increased if a parent is aged 50 or over, leaving aside the fact that the generation gap is significantly out of kilter. These two children will, as a fact, have both parents who are OAPs when they are young adolescents. One parent is highly unlikely (bearing in mind his health) to live to see them grow up. I add to that the fact that surrogacy raises significant psychological issues surrounding identity which are poorly understood at present (because surrogacy is a relatively new phenomenon) but, on the limited research we have suggest that such children are at increased risk of mental health problems and conduct disorders in adolescence. I personally think these factors are rather more important than the material advantages that wealthy people who can afford to buy children in middle and old age can offer, whatever 'loving' things they say!

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by missfrankiecat

I don't have any more intimate knowledge of Elton and David's thoughts than you. Obviously they want a child and think they will love him or her - I just don't think that is the question we as a society should be asking when sanctioning the renting of wombs for money to buy babies. I think we should have regard to a child's needs and welfare through out his/her minority. We have rules in this country for the maximum age when couples or individuals, gay or straight, are permitted to adopt or, in the case of IVF, become mothers. They are not designed arbitrarily but because a child needs love, not just expressed as passing sentimentality, but in selfless care through infancy and adolescence, stability and boundaries. Of course, some parents die young or become ill but statistically, the chances of losing a parent at psychologically significant ages are massively increased if a parent is aged 50 or over, leaving aside the fact that the generation gap is significantly out of kilter. These two children will, as a fact, have both parents who are OAPs when they are young adolescents. One parent is highly unlikely (bearing in mind his health) to live to see them grow up. I add to that the fact that surrogacy raises significant psychological issues surrounding identity which are poorly understood at present (because surrogacy is a relatively new phenomenon) but, on the limited research we have suggest that such children are at increased risk of mental health problems and conduct disorders in adolescence. I personally think these factors are rather more important than the material advantages that wealthy people who can afford to buy children in middle and old age can offer, whatever 'loving' things they say!

Oh puleeeze.
Are you serious?









.............and if you are please provide a source for that ridiculous assertion.

I'd better stop posting now because I'm getting seriously annoyed about narrow-minded ignorance.

[missfrankiecat]

Originally Posted by lexi22

I'm not disagreeing with a lot of the above as far as Elton himself is concerned (he IS a hissy-fitter and I don't see that changing, I think it's very much part and parcel of who he is) but it also doesn't mean that he hasn't grown up in other ways and is not a good, conscientious and responsible father. And really, Madonna is just as much a self-involved hissy-fitter as Elton but I also think she's shown herself to be a good conscientious mother so... really, your points are moot, no?

Not really because Madonna's parenting choices have not been the same as Elton and David. The two issues which concern me is paid surrogacy and the age of both parents. Madonna is the same age as David but the fathers of her children are both normal ages - her children (who are, in any event, older) have been able to/will grow up with parents, or at least one of a suitable age. Her adopted child will not have the same identity issues as Zach and his sibling (adoption, especially international, brings it's own issues but that is not part of this debate). If Elton and David had gone through proper assessment for adoption some years ago when they would have been likely to be approved, I would have no issue with their parenting.

[lexi22]

Originally Posted by The Prumeister

re - the age debate.

Anyone can die at any point; I think we all have examples of young people who have become parents and subsequently died soon after - so there are (of course) never any guarantees.

That aside, the fact remains that the older you get, the higher your chance of death. If Elton was 80 (which he will be in 15 years), and was embarking on this, would you seriously think that was right? He might indeed get to 80 and want a 3rd child - which he will have the money to acquire. Should it be de rigeur for anyone - no matter what their age, to be able to acquire children through whatever means necessary? An 85 year old woman who has always regretted not having kids deciding to adopt or use a surrogate? Is that fair on the child?

I think Elton & David (like many celebrities) are using the child(ren) as pets.. I can imagine Elton in his silk smoking jacket looking at a website and squealing when he sees an ickle baby that takes his fancy. As I said before, having children is a privilege and not a right (IMHO) and age should be taken into account.

Sexuality is irrelevant.

BIB - I think that's unfair, Pru. And really, unless you know him, is just your perception of him. I don't know him and can only go by what he himself says about the effect parenthood has had on him, and that's that it's been an overwhelmingly grounding and lovely thing for him. Just my impresssion. That's he's in his 60s and a bit long in the tooth for it is a fact, but not one that - JMO - entitles people to think it's a shallow experience for him.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by missfrankiecat

I don't have any more intimate knowledge of Elton and David's thoughts than you. Obviously they want a child and think they will love him or her - I just don't think that is the question we as a society should be asking when sanctioning the renting of wombs for money to buy babies. I think we should have regard to a child's needs and welfare through out his/her minority. We have rules in this country for the maximum age when couples or individuals, gay or straight, are permitted to adopt or, in the case of IVF, become mothers. They are not designed arbitrarily but because a child needs love, not just expressed as passing sentimentality, but in selfless care through infancy and adolescence, stability and boundaries. Of course, some parents die young or become ill but statistically, the chances of losing a parent at psychologically significant ages are massively increased if a parent is aged 50 or over, leaving aside the fact that the generation gap is significantly out of kilter. These two children will, as a fact, have both parents who are OAPs when they are young adolescents. One parent is highly unlikely (bearing in mind his health) to live to see them grow up. I add to that the fact that surrogacy raises significant psychological issues surrounding identity which are poorly understood at present (because surrogacy is a relatively new phenomenon) but, on the limited research we have suggest that such children are at increased risk of mental health problems and conduct disorders in adolescence. I personally think these factors are rather more important than the material advantages that wealthy people who can afford to buy children in middle and old age can offer, whatever 'loving' things they say!

As I've said on another thread, my own mother was 33 when I was born, my sister was born 10 years later. My dad was two years older than my mum. My sister always felt that our parents were too old when she was born as they were sometimes mistaken for her grandparents. Their attitudes - which were very old fashioned - were shaped by WW2 in which they both served. My grandmother was born in 1890, and had my mother when she was over 30, which makes my sister and I only one generation removed from the Victorians.

I like to think that any child born to older parents today wouldn't feel like my sister did and still does, despite our parents both being dead for nearly 20 years. I don't believe in women of over 50 becoming mothers, but I think that gay people wanting children is a different matter. Gay couples may leave it a long time to have children in their lives because they have to consider the pitfalls of parenthood even more deeply than hetero couples, and they have no choice but to go down the surrogacy route.

[DariaM]

One would have presumed that Elton John has only ever been a mere Sidecar Rider, viz a vis a be-atch..

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by Saltydog1955

As I've said on another thread, my own mother was 33 when I was born, my sister was born 10 years later. My dad was two years older than my mum. My sister always felt that our parents were too old when she was born as they were sometimes mistaken for her grandparents. Their attitudes - which were very old fashioned - were shaped by WW2 in which they both served. My grandmother was born in 1890, and had my mother when she was over 30, which makes my sister and I only one generation removed from the Victorians.

I like to think that any child born to older parents today wouldn't feel like my sister did and still does, despite our parents both being dead for nearly 20 years. I don't believe in women of over 50 becoming mothers, but I think that gay people wanting children is a different matter. Gay couples may leave it a long time to have children in their lives because they have to consider the pitfalls of parenthood even more deeply than hetero couples, and they have no choice but to go down the surrogacy route.

I know I said I was going to stop posting but I just had to.

In a world where Jeremy Kyle tries to sort out parenthood for brainless morons, I totally agree with you Saltydog. (First time for everything. (

[DiamondDoll]

Originally Posted by DariaM

One would have presumed that Elton John has only ever been a mere Sidecar Rider, viz a vis a be-atch..

I don't understand that.

[Saltydog1955]

Originally Posted by DiamondDoll

I know I said I was going to stop posting but I just had to.

In a world where Jeremy Kyle tries to sort out parenthood for brainless morons, I totally agree with you Saltydog. (First time for everything. (

The brainless hetero morons that appear on Jeremy Kyle haven't thought out the pitfalls of parenthood at all - that's why they end up having DNA tests.