67-year-old Spaniard gives birth to twins
 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe....ap/index.html

MADRID, Spain (AP) -- A 67-year-old Spanish woman became the world's oldest mother after she gave birth to twins in the northern city of Barcelona on Saturday, a hospital official said.

The woman, whose identity has not been revealed by Sant Pau hospital, gave birth by Caesarian section on Saturday, having previously undergone in vitro fertilization in the United States, according to the national news agency EFE.

Originally from the southern region of Andalucia, the new mother chose the Barcelona hospital because it specializes in high-risk births.

The mother and twins are all doing well, though the babies are both in incubators, a hospital spokeswoman said. The hospital did not reveal the gender of the twins.

The previous holder of the oldest-mother record was 66-year-old Romanian citizen Adriana Iliescu, who gave birth to baby Eliza Maria in January 2005.

Totally selfish and a very bad idea. She is going to be 73, 74 when the twins start kindergarten and in her late 80's, if alive, when they graduate from high school. What kind of mother can she be? And if she was so desperate to have a kid at that age, why not adopt.

wow. how odd. and i echo ryan's sentiment ... terrible idea, terribly selfish.

I also think it's a bad use of science and technology. Help women of a reasonable age who have trouble conceiving, don't use it for something that really goes against nature. I really try to have an open mind and believe should be able to do what they want, but this one really bothers me.

i have issues with fertility treatments in general ... i think the world is overpopulated, period. why make more people? :shrug: it's easy for me to say this, of course, because i have no intention or desire to carry a baby and give birth, and i understand that many (most? i dunno) women do have that urge. so i dunno. if my life partner wanted to do in vitro, i would stauchly oppose it, and it would probably be a deal breaker for me. there are just so many kids in foster care ... i'd much rather give one of them a permanent home.

The PTA will be up in arms...

I can't believe her doctor consented to this. :confused:

Publicity, maybe? :shrug:

So creepy. These science experiment pregnancies give me the shivers.
If you're infertile, it's probably for a reason, folks. Leave it alone already.

no kidding.

reminds me of the x files episode where they impregnate old ladies with aliens ... it's just not natural! :cool:

lol...their "beauty treatments" was it?

Yeah - this story is disturbing. I'm not against all invitro - like someone said though, at a reasonable age....not someone who is eligble to order from the early bird menu.

haha, exactly.

but think how much money she'll save ... ordering off the senior menu for herself and the kiddie menu for baby bork.

So true! lol....and it'll be handy to have two sets of hands to push that wheelchair and/or oxygen tank around...heck she can have BOTH and have both pushed around for her!! :p

do you think she'll hook up a stroller to the front of her wheelchair? would this innovation usher in a brave new world of old people having babies? tune in next time ... on sick, sad world. :wavey:

:laugh:

:lol: Sick Sad World. Oh Daria.

Yeah...hell my grandma could barely keep up with me in her 50s. A woman in her upper 60s having TWO babies is just not right. Get a poodle or a Pommeranian or something....don't have a baby!!!

i'm glad you got the daria reference. :lol:

actually, if you're really old, you probably shouldn't get a pomeranian either ... you've seen clyde bruckman, right? :laugh:

:lol: Ok...good point. And at her age that dog may well outlive her.

Just to clarify I'm not against invitro all together - some friends of mine (lesbian couple) recently did it -and they're amazing amazing parents. They're also young enough to make it to their kid's college graduation....

But yeah - in cases like this medical science just goes to far IMO.

Do you have a clue how offensive and hurtful this statement may be to some people? Probably not, considering just how ignorant it was.

i don't think it's ignorant. if people are having difficulty conceiving, perhaps it is to prevent them from passing on unhealthy genes. that doesn't mean they shouldn't become parents through adoption, just that fertility treatments may not be the best choice.

Unhealthy genes?? Truly, that is such an uninformed "opinion" on something you (and several other people here and all over this world) clearly do not have a clue about. Oh well. I'll take a wild guess though, and say that my (perfectly healthy) 7 month old daughter will probably disagree with you someday. I can assure you she was, in fact, my "best choice".

If you wanna be offended or hurt, you're going to be. How could I hurt or offend you ? You don't even know me. WTF does my opinion matter to you? Or how could it possibly impact your feelings?

I stand by the statement. I've known women and men who had fertility problems and went ahead and spent the hundred grand and had terrific problems with the pregnancies and/or children. So it isn't ignorant. My belief is based on facts I've seen. I think maybe the body is trying to tell people something if it is that hard to have kids. Some people aren't meant to procreate. I'm not meant to be pro basketball player. I'm 5'9" and have short legs. I'm also not meant to be a distance runner. Or a rocket scientist - I'm bad at math. But I have other gifts. Nature isn't stupid. We all have our purposes and abilities. And limitations.

well all i can say is i'm sorry if you took what i said personally, as that clearly that wasn't my intent. i wasn't speaking to your situation, i was speaking generally. and i still agree with sparky.

Did I say it offended or hurt *me*? Nope. It doesn't, because I've thicker skin than that. "Knowing you" really doesn't have anything to do with what you posted, does it? I'm confused by that part. It's ignorant when you are obviously uninformed--whether you've witnessed someone else going through it or not. Walk in their actual shoes and then come post. Who are you to decide which person is meant to procreate? Shall I post a picture of my daughter? All I have to do is look at her to know that the sky is the limit.

What's the difference in my situation and "generally" when they're the same? But no, I really didn't take it personally...it's just that for a board full of people that claim to be so informed about so many things, it struck me as a little ironic to see such ignorant posts.

Wasn't sure who you were talking about then.:shrug:

I am just puzzled by the idea that people could find the utterings of a stranger offensive or hurtful.

Well, that would be my information, wouldn't it?
My firsthand knowledge? :laugh:
The suffering I saw wasn't my imagination.

I can't do that because I don't want kids and as far as I know, am not infertile. Also I have no emotional or intellectual investment in passing on my genes. And I am not the one to say who should procreate or not. I didn't
make it hard for anyone. Biology did.

Knock yourself out!

Meaning what, exactly? That medicine is advanced?

Good for you that you had a kid. That's great. :)
Doesn't change my opinion about the subject, but cigars all around.

thread.takes.a.miserable.turn.

As someone who underwent four (incredibly painful) years of fertility treatment, I don't find the above statement as hurtful. Only because I've heard it all. (I've heard that if GOD wanted me to have a baby, I could just pray about it and it would happen- my answer to that was that God created brilliant doctors and scientists who are able to provide me with the medicines and procedures to get pregnant) There isn't a thing wrong with my genes, or my husband's. I just have faulty reproductive organs due to the greed of a drug company.

My mother was given a drug during her pregnancy with me that made it very difficult for me to conceive. We had numerous intrauterine inseminations and then two in-vitros. Both in-vitros resulted in ectopic pregnancies- which in turn resulted in the loss of my fallopian tubes. No worries of this girl having babies now! During those years, I would have given anything to give up and adopt. The fertility treatments were mostly covered by insurance. Adoption is not. People have this idea that there are all these babies waiting to be adopted; just go get one! Unfortunately, I don't have a spare $20 thousand dollars sitting around for that.

Unless you've gone through the pain of not being able to have a child (either biologically or through adoption) it's probably best not to make blanket statements about it. I envy people who have no desire to have children- I could have saved myself a lot of heartache if I had felt that way.

Anyway, we are going to try and adopt this year. We have to have a sit down with the in-laws and see if they will help us with a loan to be able to do this. I find it very hard to believe that this 67 year old woman was inseminated with her own embryo. It had to have been the eggs of another woman. It's just crazy and sick- I hope she has some younger relatives who will take over the raising of these twins.

Tom & I may adopt this year too...:thumbsup:

I agree on the ridiculousness of the woman's situation. The one in the original post. But I also think if we leave women the right to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy as science now safely permits, we also need to leave her the right to HAVE them, even if to us the circumstances seem ridiculous, as science now safely permits.
And we do not know her circumstances. She may have a slew of family members lined up for childcare in the event that, or when she needs help.

In any event. My own story

(Warning: lots of info, don't read if you don't want!)
I always thought I never wanted children.
I worked in child Psychiatry and Juvenile Forensics for over 15 years. That was enough to "be sure" about that. And then I also always thought I would foster and that the world was over-populated. All that.

Then, I met my now husband.
And we decided to just see what would happen. For 2 and a half years, nothing. We didn't really think about it actually.
Then, suddenly, I became pregnant. I was 39, my husband 26.
We lost that baby at 10 weeks. We went on to have three more losses. By that time, we wanted a child more than anything.

You have NO idea what pregnancy hormones do to the brain. I suddenly wanted a child more than anything in the world.

We were referred to a Reproductive Endocrinologist, and our son Quinlan, healthy and PERFECT, is the result of an IVF cycle. We lost his twin at twelve weeks.
He is the very best thing I ever quested for.
We became pregnant, naturally, again when he was 6 months, and lost that baby as well. We are currently pregnant again, finally another healthy baby again. Our second son is due in Feb.
As I am now almost 43, obviously this is it. Thankfully. I wish no one the heartache of losing babies.

I just wished to illustrate how things can change in life, and how it's really not anyone's place to judge... Of course you can have opinions, but, personal situations and choices and circumstances are always, well, that: personal and unique.

I hope she made a responsible plan for her children.
By the way, fostering and adopting are not very easy procedures or life decisions either I think.

I love our son dearly. :D

Sasja

I suddenly feel very young to have not had children yet.

Congratulations! Quinlan is a little doll. :)

I agree with this. I think it's a little easy to say that people should just accept it and move on with their lives, especially coming from people who obviously have no desire to have children. It's in everybody's biological nature to procreate and especially women have that maternal desire. Some may have other priorities and don't desire to have offspring, that's perfectly fine, but there are a lot of women that, through a lot of different circumstances, can't conceive naturally but wish to do so. Maybe it's because I'm an atheist, but I don't believe in all that 'it's what God wanted' stuff. If anything, he made it so that women should be able to conceive naturally. If he had a finger in anything, why take away the ability for couples that really want children and give it to people that throw babies in a trashcan? The whole 'God' thing is not as clear cut as some people make it out to be.

Many women that can't conceive are absolutely miserable and only when that child finally comes, in whatever what way, do they feel complete. I say, why take that away and claim these people are selfish? If they have the desire and means to fulfill their dream of having children, without hurting other people, I can't think of any reason why they shouldn't go after it. :wavey:

That said, I do agree that having twins at the age of 67 is ridiculous. That can be considered selfish, if you solely think about the children here. They will probably grow up without their mother and family members will be forced to take care of them. It's just irresponsible. :confused:

Thank you for that. While there *was* a time when I was miserable over not having a child, I certainly have grieved it and gone on with my life. But there will always be a little piece of me that knows I would be a really great mom and I hope that I'm able to get this adoption thing going.

And as far as the God thing goes, well don't even get me started on that. I've been told that in spite of having no fallopian tubes, God performs miracles, you know. :rolleyes:

Apparently she hasnt reached the stage where she's fallen and cant get up.:lol:

Just so I'm clear, I was referring only to the 67 year old woman with my comments. I think it is crazy and selfish, but she can do what she wants with her body.

I have friends (way younger) who have used fertility treatment to get pregnant and I think it is a remarkable breakthrough in science. The desire to have your own kid is natural and strong. I also don't think it is unique to women, as I have recently finished a several year period of having that strong desire.

And sparky....you don't need long legs to be a good distance runner. Track, yes, distance not so much. My dad and I both have short legs and were very good distance runners in high school.

They never helped me! And it so wasn't the point.

I still find IVF creepy. I've seen it create as much misery as it averted - WTF to do with the extra embryos? What happens when you're carrying a litter and only wanted one kid? It can be a real can of worms.

But, people being miserable over infertility is no picnic either. I'll never understand it, but I don't have those hormones or desires. Adoption is a time consuming, expensive crap shoot. I don't envy anyone having to face those choices. Nonetheless, the idea of doctors creating new life in their offices when there are so many kids on the planet without parents - it's a thoery that strikes me as odd. But it obviously serves a lot of people well.

Those poor kids. That lady is old enough to be their great-grandmother. What a crazy idea. Her doctor shouldn't have done it. I can see doing this for someone under 45 years old but not for a 67 year old. I'm a grandma and became a grandma at age 42 and I can't imagine having another baby at my age now of almost 50. I enjoy and love my grandkids and I can send them home if they start to act up:nod: I can't imagine starting over and raising a new family now. Can't exactly tote kids around to go see Stevie's concerts:D

I know it wasn't. Just another one of my failed attempts to add some levity, but forgot to include an emoticon. :cool:

I believe that is how Ledge World War I started - someone forgot an emoticon...:distress: :laugh: :xoxo:

I don't like in vitro because there are already too many kids, but I also would rather have my own kid, genetically from me, so...basically I have no point. Except my usual one, that people should stop having so many damn kids. Which isn't really related, here.