well according to their oath, doctors have a duty to protect the life and health of everyone in their care, and this includes the unborn embryos, regardless of age.
In the story (which I just heard 5mins ago on the radio actually), I think the problem was with the people allowing her to have the in vitro treatment, when she already had 6 children. If there is no law about it, then maybe it’s a time to start it. I thought the technique was only available to people who don’t have children. I think the fact that she is a “sigle mum” (the report I heard said “lesbian”) is just a media-generated detail that makes the story sell better. But it doesn’t really matter that much. The technolgy is there and she decided to use it. The real ethical question is how we should use this technology, and whether it is right to just mass-produce children as if they were chocolates off an assembly line. Do we want that as a society? Does this woman want that? If so, why? And how will these children feel? Will their lives be as meaningful and happy as they would otherwise?
And what it really boils down to is our preconceptions about the meaning of life. If life is so easy to reproduce, and a woman can just go and order 14 kids off the shelf of her nearest clinic, then what happens to our religious notions of the eternal soul, and social individuality?