A 63 Year Old Expecting Mother... - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

KnifeMissile · 05-04-2006, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Mother-to-be, 63, defends decision to have a baby

A 63-year-old child psychiatrist who is pregnant after fertility treatment has said the decision to become Britain's oldest mother required "courage and a great deal of thought".

Dr Patricia Rashbrook paid a reported £50,000 for treatment with the controversial Italian fertility expert Dr Severino Antinori and the baby is due in two months' time. Anti-abortion groups expressed outrage at the case, but Dr Rashbrook and her husband, John Farrant, 61, said they had thought about the consequences of becoming parents at pension age.

In a statement yesterday, the couple said: "We are pleased to acknowledge this pregnancy, notwithstanding its unusual and potentially controversial aspects.

"We wish to emphasise that this has not been an endeavour undertaken lightly or without courage, that a great deal of thought has been given to planning and providing for the child's present and future well-being, medically, socially and materially."

They added: "We have greatly valued the warm support shown to us by family, friends and colleagues. We are very happy to have given life to an already much-loved baby and our wish now is to give him the peace and security he needs."

Dr Rashbrook, who has a son aged 22 and a 26-year-old daughter from her first marriage, is a consultant child psychiatrist with the East Sussex Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service. Her first husband died 10 years ago, and she is believed to have married Mr Farrant, an academic who is writing a book on 16th-century maritime history, only recently. They live in a Georgian townhouse in Lewes, East Sussex.

Friends of the couple say Dr Rashbrook's grown-up children are happy about their mother's pregnancy. She has also informed the NHS trust which employs her about the pregnancy and, according to reports, intends to return to work.

Dr Rashbrook and her husband are believed to have travelled to Rome to be treated by Dr Antinori at his clinic there. They have refused to discuss the treatment, but it is unlikely that Dr Rashbrook would have been able to use her own eggs and may instead have had IVF using donated eggs and sperm as well as needing hormone treatment.

Dr Antinori said the couple first consulted him three years ago. "When a couple love each other, it's natural they want to have a baby," he said. "Age isn't important in this decision; what's important is the physical condition of the mother."

Dr Antinori has courted controversy before by treating post-menopausal women and claiming to have created a cloned baby.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, the UK regulatory agency, has not imposed an age limit on women, but the law states that doctors must take into account the welfare of the child and the ability of patients to provide a stable and healthy upbringing.

Josephine Quintavalle, from the lobby group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said: "It is extremely difficult for a child to have a mother who is as old as a grandmother would be. She is being selfish and sometimes greater love is saying no."

Matthew O'Gorman, of the campaign group Life, said: "We see this just as another component in our culture where children are treated as a means to an end. He or she is going to be without a mother or father at the most crucial moment of adolescence or when that child is growing to maturity. This is not the way to bring a child into the world."

Most British clinics refuse to treat women over 45, although some doctors, such as Professor Ian Craft, have treated women in their fifties. In January last year, Adriana Iliescu, a 67-year-old Romanian, became the oldest woman in the world known to have given birth.

Women over 40 who become pregnant have double the risk of stillbirth and other complications.

What's with the anti-abortion groups? She's choosing to have the baby.

The only concern I have with a woman having a baby this late in life is being around long enough to raise the baby. Otherwise, I really don't feel comfortable telling someone else whether or not they may have a child.

Mind you, I'm the sort who thinks that children practically raise themselves, so perhaps my opinions are less than popular...

ngdawg · 05-04-2006, 08:36 PM

No, children don't 'practically raise themselves' at all. It's a LOT of work that doesn't end with the last diaper. Of course, she knows that, so it's a moot point.
All I can say is, it's her life, but I, being less than a score younger, think these women having post-menopausal babies are off their rockers......on the other hand, the baby can lie on the floor and nurse as she lies on the sofa

Ok, I"m so going to hell for that one

Vincentt · 05-05-2006, 12:53 AM

I'm going to bet this baby will be very glad that his mother went though all this trouble to give him life.

Shit, might be a good time to be a mother, you are already done with all the stuff you wanted to do. So having a kid will be with out the doubts of "If i hadn't had children I could be on broadway" or whatnot.

Plus she and her husband can stay at home with the baby full-time.

Of course, when the kid is moving out of the house etc.. it may be their time to go. But, alas, in some ways, having those strings cut, could set the child free.

Not going to say it is the Best. Just that who is to say that this couldn't work out well.

others should mind their own business

percy · 05-05-2006, 02:56 AM

Josephine Quintavalle, from the lobby group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said: "It is extremely difficult for a child to have a mother who is as old as a grandmother would be. She is being selfish and sometimes greater love is saying no."

Well first of all, it isn't anyones business what she does.Maybe she is 63 but looks and feels 45.

And second, is this really news worthy. I'm not being critical of the post but really,who cares. Do we really need so-called experts commenting on someones person private life. Geez you don't even have to be the person in question to try and grab that elusive 15 minutes that so many strive for. Pick me Pick me Pick me.

Sorry, venting cuz I have cramps and don't want to go to work today.

cyrnel · 05-05-2006, 03:10 AM

Wow. Can't say she made an easy choice.

Hope she lives long enough to see the child through adolescence.

Five dollars says the kid gets a perm and plenty of little red sweaters for gifts. Yap, yap.

highthief · 05-05-2006, 04:06 AM

Wouldn't be my choice, that's for sure. They may not even live to see the kid finish secondary education.

little_tippler · 05-05-2006, 04:26 AM

I had a friend in Uni whose parents were in their 70's while she was in her 20's...she had a terrible relationship with them, particularly due to age gap issues. I'm sure she doesn't wish they hadn't had her, duh, but she didn't totally understand the reasons for having her.

I think you shouldn't be having babies at 63, because even though it may be something the woman really wants, I don't think it's fair on the child. It seems a selfish decision to me. I hope I'm never in that position.

Glava · 05-05-2006, 04:44 AM

I think anti-abortion groups are against this because the process of artificial fertilization requires wasting many fertilized eggs just so one could work.

stevie667 · 05-05-2006, 06:21 AM

Good on the woman, she's having a baby.

Poor bastard will have an entirely new meaning to being ashamed of its parents.

maleficent · 05-05-2006, 06:35 AM

I might have a different opinion if this woman didn't already have two children... I might think her biological clock snoozed for too long and now she's finally ready...even having the first child at age 63 isn't right.

I also might have a different opinion if the woman became pregnant without artificial means... This wasn't an accident, this was intentional... There's a reason why fertility clinics won't treat women over a certain age... Common sense is think is one of the reasons.

Children require energy... I'm not sure a 63 year old, no matter how good a health they are in, have the energy to mind a child - especially when it's a toddler... There was some study years back that professional football players had their asses kicked trying to keep up with toddlers... a 63 year old will have a tough time.

Vincentt · 05-05-2006, 06:49 AM

I guess since I spent so much of my childhood with my Grandmother. I find people saying they can't get along to be utter bullshit.

You think the age gap is really the reason those people don't get along?
I don't.

maleficent · 05-05-2006, 06:54 AM

It's not the getting along that worries me - it's the energy to keep up with a child... grandma babysitting junior is one thing.. junior goes home and grandma can relax... being a parent is non-stop... yes, she can have nannies and crap like that - but if she's doing that -what's the point of having the kid? as an accessory? to say she did at her age?

Ample · 05-05-2006, 07:08 AM

I think that is pretty selfish of her to do that. She is well eduacted she knows the risk factors of having a child "with problems" at that late in her life.

Scorps · 05-05-2006, 10:04 PM

OMG 63 is pushing it a little to far. She will be lucky if she lives through the brith! I don't know the pain myself but the way my GF was crushing my hand it had to hurt.

analog · 05-05-2006, 11:50 PM

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.

Vincentt · 05-06-2006, 05:55 AM

You know, maybe she is just being selfish, having a old mom would suck. And what if she died on you, wow that would suck too. Parents shouldn't be so selfish as to die on their kids.

You know, growing up poor would suck too.

If all the poor families would just stop being so selfish and stop having kids.
We wouldn't have to worry about them either.

percy · 05-06-2006, 07:07 AM

I find it interesting people think she is being selfish. I myself have been labelled and been called selfish for not wanting to bear children. But I suspect the 63 year old in question is like me and doesn't give a shit what the armchair critics in the world think.We live our lives and leave it up to others to talk about our lives.

And for Vincentt's post above this one.Best post in this thread

analog · 05-06-2006, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincentt

You know, maybe she is just being selfish, having a old mom would suck. And what if she died on you, wow that would suck too. Parents shouldn't be so selfish as to die on their kids.

You know, growing up poor would suck too.

If all the poor families would just stop being so selfish and stop having kids.
We wouldn't have to worry about them either.

Your sarcasm aside (which I do appreciate, but disagree with the gist of), If you know you can't raise the kid properly, then you're just having the kid to serve your own want. And yes, this goes for people who are poor as well. If you don't have the means to raise a child, don't have a damn child- the world does not owe you a child, and especially not the government. I wish people would understand this and stop raping the government because they keep spitting out kids they can't AT ALL afford to have. If you can't afford to have a child, it is selfish to automatically expect other people (the government) to pay for it. You're free to have as many children as you want (in this country, anyway), and it is your right to do so- it is not your right to be owed anything by the country in which you live for caring for your baby-factory habits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by percy

I find it interesting people think she is being selfish. I myself have been labelled and been called selfish for not wanting to bear children. But I suspect the 63 year old in question is like me and doesn't give a shit what the armchair critics in the world think.We live our lives and leave it up to others to talk about our lives.

I've been told this as well- that i'm being selfish for NOT having children. Personally, i've seen both sides of this argument- I know some people who will absolutely say YES, I am being selfish that I don't want to waste a ton of my money on a child, I want to enjoy myself. I've also seen those who say that having a kid is simply not for them, in which case selfishness is simply not in evidence. People's opinions are going to be what they're going to be, and you're right that we shouldn't necessarily care about the armchair critics.

The point I was originally making is that if you know you can't support a child, don't have a damn child. I'm not being negative (or at least trying not to be) about her- I hope she lives to 120 so her poor kid's life isn't fucked up by losing his elderly mom at a young age. And i'm not saying a normal life can't be lead after that, but it's completely unnecessary to place such a high risk on putting a child through all that hell.

percy · 05-06-2006, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by analog

The point I was originally making is that if you know you can't support a child, don't have a damn child. I'm not being negative (or at least trying not to be) about her- I hope she lives to 120 so her poor kid's life isn't fucked up by losing his elderly mom at a young age. And i'm not saying a normal life can't be lead after that, but it's completely unnecessary to place such a high risk on putting a child through all that hell.

I understand your point but who is to say she can't support a child. She is a psychiatrist so the funds must be available. And we don't know what arrangments have been made with her family regarding her want to have a child and the future of the child should she die sooner than expected.

And why would the kid's life be fucked up if the parent dies? People half her age with children die all the time.Are the lives of their children all fucked up?

And who says the child will go through hell. Good lord, look at all the people half this womans age who have kids, put them in daycare, let nanny's take care of them, ship them off here and there and barely be a parent at all.At least this woman at her age will have all the time in the world raising her child rather than a significant amount of other people who have others raising their kids because they are too busy to be a parent.

Evileyez · 05-16-2006, 06:28 PM

It's kinda strange to be 63 and having a baby.....I think they child should be the first preference. What's gonna happen when that child is in its teens? How will she be able to handle that? How will the child be able to handle that? Now if the mothers develops some sorta illness or old age starts kicking in the child will be let to deal with that. It might put unnecesary amounts of responsibility on the child.
I personally feel that its kinda wrong to have a baby at that age but its her life

kutulu · 05-17-2006, 08:31 AM

Vincentt,

Yes I understand it's sarcasm but if you consider that half of the country is practically poor our whole system would experience a complete meltdown if poor people also didn't have kids.

KM,

Kids raise themselves? How many kids have you raised?

Overall, this is a terrible choice by the parents. The docs involved with getting this woman pregnant should be severely punished, if not forced out of medicine.

Teens shouldn't have to bury their parents, my Dad's mom died when he was about 14. His dad died when he was only 23. I think their deaths had strong effects on his ability to open up. This kid will be lucky if either parent lasts till it turns 20. Even if they do, their quality of life will not be great for the last five years. That's a lot to ask a teen to deal with. Totally selfish.

percy · 05-17-2006, 01:32 PM

I just don't get why people think this is selfish.Everyone has their opinions and that is great, but I think the selfish tag is a little to judgemental.

How many people spend hours upon hours on the TFP when they could be doing something like volunteer work. Is that selfish that young capable adults are sitting infront of a computer screen for their own enjoyment?

By the way.Isaac Hayes had a baby at 63. Selfish bastard he is,...

0000000000000000000

Isaac Hayes the Father of Baby Boy
May 16, 8:44 PM EST

The Associated Press

MEMPHIS, Tenn. -- Isaac Hayes and his wife are the parents of a baby boy, the couple announced Tuesday.

Nana Kwadjo Hayes was born April 10 and weighed 8 pounds, 5 ounces, spokesman Rob Moore said.

In the Ghanaian language, Nana means "King," and Kwadjo (pronounced "Kwo-Jo") means "boy born on Monday."

In 1992, Hayes was coronated an honorary king of the Ada district of Ghana for his humanitarian work.

Kwadjo is Hayes' fourth son and the first with wife Adjowa.

The 63-year-old soul singer and actor is best known for his recordings with Stax Records in Memphis and his 1971 No. 1 hit "Theme From Shaft," from the Richard Roundtree film "Shaft." The soundtrack also won the Oscar for best musical score.

More recently, he was the voice of the character Chef on the TV show "South Park," until he quit the role in a disagreement over the show's treatment of his faith, Scientology.

http://music.msn.com/music/article.a...23453&GT1=7702

05-04-2006, 08:36 PM	#2 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	No, children don't 'practically raise themselves' at all. It's a LOT of work that doesn't end with the last diaper. Of course, she knows that, so it's a moot point. All I can say is, it's her life, but I, being less than a score younger, think these women having post-menopausal babies are off their rockers......on the other hand, the baby can lie on the floor and nurse as she lies on the sofa Ok, I"m so going to hell for that one __________________ Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

05-05-2006, 12:53 AM	#3 (permalink)
Vincentt Addict Location: Tokyo, Japan	I'm going to bet this baby will be very glad that his mother went though all this trouble to give him life. Shit, might be a good time to be a mother, you are already done with all the stuff you wanted to do. So having a kid will be with out the doubts of "If i hadn't had children I could be on broadway" or whatnot. Plus she and her husband can stay at home with the baby full-time. Of course, when the kid is moving out of the house etc.. it may be their time to go. But, alas, in some ways, having those strings cut, could set the child free. Not going to say it is the Best. Just that who is to say that this couldn't work out well. others should mind their own business __________________ .

05-05-2006, 03:10 AM	#5 (permalink)
cyrnel Adequate Location: In my angry-dome.	Wow. Can't say she made an easy choice. Hope she lives long enough to see the child through adolescence. Five dollars says the kid gets a perm and plenty of little red sweaters for gifts. Yap, yap. __________________ There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195

05-05-2006, 04:06 AM	#6 (permalink)
highthief Junkie Location: Ontario, Canada	Wouldn't be my choice, that's for sure. They may not even live to see the kid finish secondary education. __________________ Si vis pacem parabellum.

05-05-2006, 04:26 AM	#7 (permalink)
little_tippler Leaning against the -Sun- Super Moderator Location: on the other side	I had a friend in Uni whose parents were in their 70's while she was in her 20's...she had a terrible relationship with them, particularly due to age gap issues. I'm sure she doesn't wish they hadn't had her, duh, but she didn't totally understand the reasons for having her. I think you shouldn't be having babies at 63, because even though it may be something the woman really wants, I don't think it's fair on the child. It seems a selfish decision to me. I hope I'm never in that position. __________________ Whether we write or speak or do but look We are ever unapparent. What we are Cannot be transfused into word or book. Our soul from us is infinitely far. However much we give our thoughts the will To be our soul and gesture it abroad, Our hearts are incommunicable still. In what we show ourselves we are ignored. The abyss from soul to soul cannot be bridged By any skill of thought or trick of seeming. Unto our very selves we are abridged When we would utter to our thought our being. We are our dreams of ourselves, souls by gleams, And each to each other dreams of others' dreams. Fernando Pessoa, 1918

05-05-2006, 02:56 AM	#4 (permalink)
percy Addict	Josephine Quintavalle, from the lobby group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said: "It is extremely difficult for a child to have a mother who is as old as a grandmother would be. She is being selfish and sometimes greater love is saying no." Well first of all, it isn't anyones business what she does.Maybe she is 63 but looks and feels 45. And second, is this really news worthy. I'm not being critical of the post but really,who cares. Do we really need so-called experts commenting on someones person private life. Geez you don't even have to be the person in question to try and grab that elusive 15 minutes that so many strive for. Pick me Pick me Pick me. Sorry, venting cuz I have cramps and don't want to go to work today.

05-05-2006, 04:44 AM	#8 (permalink)
Glava Betitled	I think anti-abortion groups are against this because the process of artificial fertilization requires wasting many fertilized eggs just so one could work.

05-05-2006, 06:21 AM	#9 (permalink)
stevie667 Too Awesome for Aardvarks Location: Angloland	Good on the woman, she's having a baby. Poor bastard will have an entirely new meaning to being ashamed of its parents. __________________ Office hours have changed. Please call during office hours for more information.

05-05-2006, 06:35 AM	#10 (permalink)
maleficent Junkie Moderator Emeritus Location: Chicago	I might have a different opinion if this woman didn't already have two children... I might think her biological clock snoozed for too long and now she's finally ready...even having the first child at age 63 isn't right. I also might have a different opinion if the woman became pregnant without artificial means... This wasn't an accident, this was intentional... There's a reason why fertility clinics won't treat women over a certain age... Common sense is think is one of the reasons. Children require energy... I'm not sure a 63 year old, no matter how good a health they are in, have the energy to mind a child - especially when it's a toddler... There was some study years back that professional football players had their asses kicked trying to keep up with toddlers... a 63 year old will have a tough time. __________________ Free your heart from hatred. Free your mind from worries. Live simply. Give more. Expect less.

05-05-2006, 06:49 AM	#11 (permalink)
Vincentt Addict Location: Tokyo, Japan	I guess since I spent so much of my childhood with my Grandmother. I find people saying they can't get along to be utter bullshit. You think the age gap is really the reason those people don't get along? I don't. __________________ .

05-05-2006, 06:54 AM	#12 (permalink)
maleficent Junkie Moderator Emeritus Location: Chicago	It's not the getting along that worries me - it's the energy to keep up with a child... grandma babysitting junior is one thing.. junior goes home and grandma can relax... being a parent is non-stop... yes, she can have nannies and crap like that - but if she's doing that -what's the point of having the kid? as an accessory? to say she did at her age? __________________ Free your heart from hatred. Free your mind from worries. Live simply. Give more. Expect less.

05-05-2006, 07:08 AM	#13 (permalink)
Ample Psycho Location: In your closet	I think that is pretty selfish of her to do that. She is well eduacted she knows the risk factors of having a child "with problems" at that late in her life.

05-05-2006, 10:04 PM	#14 (permalink)
Scorps Lost!! Location: Kingston, Ontario	OMG 63 is pushing it a little to far. She will be lucky if she lives through the brith! I don't know the pain myself but the way my GF was crushing my hand it had to hurt.

05-05-2006, 11:50 PM	#15 (permalink)
analog Banned	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.

05-06-2006, 05:55 AM	#16 (permalink)
Vincentt Addict Location: Tokyo, Japan	You know, maybe she is just being selfish, having a old mom would suck. And what if she died on you, wow that would suck too. Parents shouldn't be so selfish as to die on their kids. You know, growing up poor would suck too. If all the poor families would just stop being so selfish and stop having kids. We wouldn't have to worry about them either. __________________ .

05-06-2006, 07:07 AM	#17 (permalink)
percy Addict	I find it interesting people think she is being selfish. I myself have been labelled and been called selfish for not wanting to bear children. But I suspect the 63 year old in question is like me and doesn't give a shit what the armchair critics in the world think.We live our lives and leave it up to others to talk about our lives. And for Vincentt's post above this one.Best post in this thread

05-16-2006, 06:28 PM	#20 (permalink)
Evileyez Upright	It's kinda strange to be 63 and having a baby.....I think they child should be the first preference. What's gonna happen when that child is in its teens? How will she be able to handle that? How will the child be able to handle that? Now if the mothers develops some sorta illness or old age starts kicking in the child will be let to deal with that. It might put unnecesary amounts of responsibility on the child. I personally feel that its kinda wrong to have a baby at that age but its her life __________________ There's gonna be some things you gonna see that will make it hard to smile in the future. But through whatever you see, through all the rain and all the pain you gotta keep your sense of humour. You gotta be able to smile through all this bullshit

05-17-2006, 08:31 AM	#21 (permalink)
kutulu Junkie	Vincentt, Yes I understand it's sarcasm but if you consider that half of the country is practically poor our whole system would experience a complete meltdown if poor people also didn't have kids. KM, Kids raise themselves? How many kids have you raised? Overall, this is a terrible choice by the parents. The docs involved with getting this woman pregnant should be severely punished, if not forced out of medicine. Teens shouldn't have to bury their parents, my Dad's mom died when he was about 14. His dad died when he was only 23. I think their deaths had strong effects on his ability to open up. This kid will be lucky if either parent lasts till it turns 20. Even if they do, their quality of life will not be great for the last five years. That's a lot to ask a teen to deal with. Totally selfish.

05-17-2006, 01:32 PM	#22 (permalink)
percy Addict	I just don't get why people think this is selfish.Everyone has their opinions and that is great, but I think the selfish tag is a little to judgemental. How many people spend hours upon hours on the TFP when they could be doing something like volunteer work. Is that selfish that young capable adults are sitting infront of a computer screen for their own enjoyment? By the way.Isaac Hayes had a baby at 63. Selfish bastard he is,... 0000000000000000000 Isaac Hayes the Father of Baby Boy May 16, 8:44 PM EST The Associated Press MEMPHIS, Tenn. -- Isaac Hayes and his wife are the parents of a baby boy, the couple announced Tuesday. Nana Kwadjo Hayes was born April 10 and weighed 8 pounds, 5 ounces, spokesman Rob Moore said. In the Ghanaian language, Nana means "King," and Kwadjo (pronounced "Kwo-Jo") means "boy born on Monday." In 1992, Hayes was coronated an honorary king of the Ada district of Ghana for his humanitarian work. Kwadjo is Hayes' fourth son and the first with wife Adjowa. The 63-year-old soul singer and actor is best known for his recordings with Stax Records in Memphis and his 1971 No. 1 hit "Theme From Shaft," from the Richard Roundtree film "Shaft." The soundtrack also won the Oscar for best musical score. More recently, he was the voice of the character Chef on the TV show "South Park," until he quit the role in a disagreement over the show's treatment of his faith, Scientology. http://music.msn.com/music/article.a...23453&GT1=7702