60 year old has twins.
 

Article

According to fox 5 news she had IVS in South Africa. To me this is insane no offense, but I do not know what age should be the cutoff, but at 60, how can she take care of them for the next 18 years...

My friends and I frequently have this discussion. Its too fucking old to be having kids, sorry its just plain selfish. When the kids are adolescents, the parents will be pensioners--if they're lucky still in good health, luckier still if they're even alive.
Come on.

It’s crazy to do something like that. When the baby becomes adults, their parents may have already died.

Selfish. Stupid. Irresponsible.

Wow, this is crazy!

They're way to old to be having kids, I didnt even think it was possible at that age. Go figure.

Makes me sick. And as you all have said selfish. It's completely unfair to the kids. Their parents could go at any time. I mean it can happen to anyone at any age, but they're lucky to have 20 years with their parents, and it's just not enough. People think they are entitled to have kids. I think that's bullshit. It's like people who are cracked out having kids, teenagers having kids, people who can't afford kids having kids, it's like, well we're human, it's what we do, we're supposed to. No, you're supposed to make an informed decision and bring babies into the world only to give them the best opportunity to become responsible, respectful contributors to society. This is a pet peeve of mine.

On the plus side, they'll be able to get their brother to pose as their dad when they're older.

Completly irresponsible having kids at that age.

My initial impulse is right in line with everyone else - WTF is she thinking? But really, what's the problem? Life span is increasing, quality of life is increasing, and many kids who are born to dumbfucks end up being raised by their grandparents, who are older than this woman in many cases. These babies are wanted and loved, so who cares how old she is? I'm not a huge fan of reproductive technology, but I don't see how this is in any way unethical just because she's 15-20 years older than many of us are comfortable with for a mother.

i would think her old body would break under the strain. amazing she didn't die and the kids didn't either die or come out all messed up. there is a reason you can't have children naturally after a certain age, i wonder how healthy those kids are...

I had my twins at what, at the time, was considered a late age-37 1/2. Now, while their cousins and children of our friends are getting married, graduating college and the parents are enjoying new-found freedoms, we still have kids to raise. Would I trade anything? NO fucking way...but I sure wouldn't have continued trying much longer had the procedure not worked.
There's a reason we go through menopause. And this woman already had kids, what was her motivation for being so incredibly selfish and risky? My kids tease me about being 'old'...hers will be downright embarrassed, should she live to 75 and beyond.
At what point should we say "Forget it."? Even with media proclaiming '50 is the new 40', she's too fucking old!!
/me shakes her head....

Sure there's nothing really wrong with it, her personal choice really. I just get so sick of people having kids selfishly though. And while I don't know this woman's motivations, it just seems incredibley odd to me to want to do that. It's like people have the attitude, well I am built to have/help make (men's case) babies so why not? Or, I'm lonely I want a kid. Or I am dumb and don't use protection, oops a kid. Or, our marriage sucks, let's have a baby to make things better. Or the government will pay me more the more kids I have. I wonder what this ladies other kids think of this? I know if my mum decided to have more children I would be personally disgusted. I mean, especially coz I hate her boyfriend, and it wouldn't be a full sibling to me. But I'd be thinking... mid life crisis? Or in this other woman's case, three/quarter life crisis? I dunno, it weirds me out.

On a side note: ngdawg, I'm so glad you were able to have kids :) But I completely get what you're saying about not continuing to try past a certain point, as you said, menopause happens for a reason! Mother nature's way of saying NO KIDS FOR YOU! Hehee. :)

In today's NY Daily News:
Story
First, if it's so 'natural', she would not have had to buy eggs or freeze them from years before, she'd have made them when it was 'time' to conceive.
Second, if it's her life and makes her happy, why keep it a secret?
Great that she's happy, but it's not her that is the main issue, it's those babies. How selfish and vain can one person be?
Oh well, we can pontificate til the next blue moon, but it's done.
But someone needs to smack some sense into the next post-menopausal woman who walks into a fertility clinic....

Her body.
Her choice.

Makes the conversation a little different when couched in those terms, doesn't it?

I'm sure the age issue was discussed thoroughly with the entire family beforehand, and I imagine that the doctors involved insisted on it.

If the story were about a man having twins at age 60 with a younger wife, it never would have seen print.

First off, yes her body, her choice. Doesn't mean it was the right choice, a good choice, etc. but yes, it was still her choice.

Although it does bring a slightly sadistic chuckle to think what a time they'll have keeping track of which twin is which if they come down with Alzheimers.

Edit: P.S. - A man at 60+ having a child with a younger wife is not as much of an issue. Same if the older woman had a younger husband. Then there is at least one parent with a lower risk of health issues to take care of the child. In this case both parents are getting on up their in years.

Wow, you managed to diagnose Alzheimers from this article? Are you House? :)

Seriously, there's no reason to think that they will have health problems from the article above. She was clearly healthy enough to carry twins to term, which actually means quite a lot.

So people should not have children if they aren't in perfect health? My mom has a slight heart murmer, so does that mean that my brother and I shouldn't exist? My wife's cousin has an aggressive form of MS and is confined to a wheelchair, but they have 3 kids under 8 - are they selfish?

Why is it ok for her to have a child at 54 but not at 60? What's the magic cut off age? I was 35 when my son was born - does that make me selfish since I'll be over 50 when he gets out of high school?

The article doesn't state whether the 6 year old was an IVF, but I'd reckon he is.
If your cousin, despite her illness, was otherwise capable of conceiving and carrying her kids, of course not. But there's a couple of issues here that are turn-offs: first being that these kids were conceived after menopause and not of their own doing. Menopause carries its own risks-some include the deterioration of bone mass, which can be exasperated by pregnancy, changes to the reproductive organs, making the uterus thinner, changes in the circulatory system and slowing down of metabolism.
I had my twins at 37 1/2 and was very high-risk, being in bed 2/3 of the term, but I had mine at full term; judging by the weights of her babies, she did not and probably would not have been able to.
The other issue is, of course, the actual age of this couple. No one is guaranteed a long full healthy life but they're closer to not being here longer than you or I; is it fair to think that you'd raise them, hopefully, to adulthood before dying? The Alzheimer's suggestion is not out of the realms of possibilities for someone in their 60's, nor is a myriad of other problems, ie; my father has been in pretty good health most of his life, then hit 75 and all hell broke loose. He's still relatively in decent shape, but he's old. Who really thinks about that, though? Just as those kids are going through adolescence, these people will be(maybe, in all probability) taking insulin pills, high blood pressure meds, etc.

Way too old to be having kids unless theyre filthy rich and can afford to pay for their care in some way after theyre gone. And even then, it would still be pretty bad. In this case it's not her body her choice, its the kids body and they get no choice.

Now there are a million and one ways to be an irresponsible parent. It's stupid, but by comparison to what other parents are doing, it's rather unimportant.

NG - maybe and in all probability are two different things. My next door neighbor (until about 2 years ago) was 85 when he died after falling off a slippery rock in a rain storm on a 12 mile hike. He wasn't on any medication at all. His wife, in the years before she died, took about 40 pills a day because of their illnesses. My point is that individuals are exactly that - individuals. You can no more tell me that either parent in this story are going to contract any condition than I can predict who will win a horse race.

Is this a high-risk pregnancy? Absolutely. Could it have long-reaching health effects on the mother? Absolutely? Does it mean she'll develop Alzheimers, diabetes or high blood pressure? No. Does it say anything about the health of the father? No. Does it say anything about the support system they have in place? No.

I agree that the 6-year old was IVF. There's really no question that the twins are.

My cousin cannot stand on his own and has never held his youngest child other than in his lap. There's no way that he can care for them on his own. So, is he selfish? If he's not, is there a double standard for men and women?

It's not how old you are, when being a parent.
It's your state of health and energy.
Perhaps she is in great condition and really takes care of herself. She has lots of experience raising kids.
If the kids get along with their parents for 18 years they are lucky.

I misunderstood, thinking the cousin was a woman going thru it, but no, he is not selfish; I'd say it's a fine line, but a line nonetheless. This couple had to literally purchase this pregnancy because of their advanced age. Also, they're parents of two adults, a young boy and now infants-this wasn't a case of someone who had to wait for medical science to catch up to a desire to have a family(something I had to do, incidently). More, this would appear to be a case of 'we're rich, we like kids, let's make a couple more and see what happens To hell with being old'.
The double standard, if there is one, is pretty clearcut-women go through menopause, a literal dying off of eggs and shutting down of the reproductive system. It's connection with the body as a whole is pretty obvious. Men, while they may experience diminished fertility, remain mostly fertile all their lives. It's just natural-they aren't the ones who have to bear the children, so their bodies don't have to 'shut down'.
I don't advocate either gender getting into parenthood so late, or even by my age, but that's not my decision to place that opinion on others. I just have this "Don't these people think ahead??" thing.....the most well-known late parent would probably be Tony Randall, whose first child was born when he was about 77-he died about 5-6 years later.

I do agree with her body her choice. The thing is, eventually this becomes societies problem. The risk is high that these kids will not have their parents around for a long time, time is against them. My issue is people are having kids just because they can it seems and not fully thinking through the outcome. The oops babies, the we can't afford it babies, the let's make it work babies, the mid-life/three-quarter life crisis babies, etc etc. It bothers me because in different ways it is putting many strains on society. I can't really go into it all here, I don't think it's the most appropriate thread, but this has been a big peeve of mine for a long time. I am all for choice, but I think it's just irresponsible at that age to be bringing children into the world. I think it is just as bad when old men have a ton of babies with young women, but for some reason this seems to go unnoticed and isn't discussed to the extent that a woman at this age to do the same. Believe me, in my books, it's the exact same thing, no double standard with me. As for a parent with a heart murmur, I have no problem with that. If there are two parents who feel the risk is worth it, can afford to have kids, are of the appropriate age, and are doing it for the right reason (as your mum did the_jazz) then I think that is perfectly fine! My main issues that surpasses this one issue is that having kids is not taken as seriously as it should be and people seem to have kids just because they feel it's their given right. Psh.

I'm glad I wasn't the doctor that had to preform the birth...


ew...


That's worse then old man balls... :D

Muahaha, so hilarious and so true! :)

Not to nitpick, but it's fairly common for pregnant women to become diabetic and hypertensive (have high blood pressure). They're both induced by the pregnancy and usually stop after the delivery of the child, though diabetes does not always immediately go away.

I know you were just grasping for examples, but thought I'd toss a little info in anyway. :)

Just to play Devil's Advocate:

Define what risks are acceptable and what aren't.
Define the net worth required to bear children comfortably.
Define what reasons are right and which are wrong.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but what you're suggesting is completely subjective. If you asked me for my own personal boundaries, I think you'd probably be shocked and horrified, but those are for my kids, not anyone else's.

Actually I knew that, but you were right about grasping at the examples. I really meant post-childbirth development of both but obviously didn't make that clear at all.

I think...that it's none of my business.

No crime is being committed. Stupidity, maybe. If it makes it on the ballot, I'll vote on it. Until then, I have a heck of a lot of other things to worry about.