She's a moron. Her life expectancy doesn't equate to her kid's 18th birthday. I'm not pulling this info out of my ass-
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloa...alth/HSQ29.pdf
Those are the average life expectancies for England, where she lives- I might also add that life expectancy numbers are for people born NOW, not born 63 years ago. Their numbers are likely a bit different (the reasons being that people born now typically have more, and better, healthcare options in addition to better available nutrition, stuff like that). Of course, if you tried to measure life expectancy in England in 1943, you might not have gotten very nice-looking numbers, what with the war and all.
For females, it's 80 years of age, and they're estimation for "healthy years" is 69 years if you're born today.
So she's 81 when the kid is 18. Assuming she makes it that far, and isn't physically exhausted by raising yet another child.
It seems that for some people, selfish desires are enough of a reason to do anything, including potentially fucking over your child by dying before they're even 18 years old.
Who's going to raise the poor kid if she doesn't last as long as she thinks she will? If she goes, the husband will likely not be far behind, just by age alone- so who? The country? Foster care?
Now sure, we could all go at any time- bad things happen, etc. But when you're 63 already... you won't be alive forever. Just do the math. She better be as healthy as a horse and live to be 103 to make it worthwhile. It's just so selfish to take that gamble of putting your child without their mother, when it's forseeable and avoidable.