Talk

Advanced search

This is an odd one, Palins 5th child is apparantly her 17 year old daughters?

(334 Posts)
jojosmaman Mon 01-Sep-08 09:59:07

... according to some reports in the US?

here

Dogsby Mon 01-Sep-08 09:59:41

ah we haev done that on the other thread

tiredemma Mon 01-Sep-08 10:00:32

I got confued then and thought that you were talking about Michael palin. He of Monty Python fame.

WendyWeber Mon 01-Sep-08 10:01:29

We were talking about this yesterday, jjm - here.

The circumstantial evidence is very convincing...hmm

jojosmaman Mon 01-Sep-08 10:04:23

Damn and blast, I thought I was being an intellectual by posting something on "in the news" but alas its been done! I'll skip off back to Heat...

... so is it bollox then? (Havent got time to read the thread as in work)

zippitippitoes Mon 01-Sep-08 10:05:17

i thiought you meant michel palin too

no idea who you do mean tho

WendyWeber Mon 01-Sep-08 10:05:52

No, not bollox, it all adds up very neatly...<too neatly? strokes moustache>

The photos of SP in previous pregnanciy compared with this one, plus photos of her daughter earlier this year, are pretty convincing too.

jojosmaman Mon 01-Sep-08 10:13:11

How sad if its true, what would the harm have been to say your daughter had given birth at 17 but you were going to support her and ensure the best care is given to your first grandchild?? Surely she would have been respected more for this, esp from the women voters? Instead she now appears untrustworthy, nice choice McCain!

FAQ Mon 01-Sep-08 10:13:32

certainly sounds very suspect.

LazyLinePainterJane Mon 01-Sep-08 10:19:01

But all the available pictures show a concealed abdomen. She might not be pregnant, but there is no good pictoral evidence to show that she isn't.

And as for that pic of the daughter, well, that could just be tummy.

Vian Mon 01-Sep-08 10:30:31

McStupid and co did NOT vet her properly before choosing her as VP. Now the shit is going to hit the fan.

StellaDallas Mon 01-Sep-08 16:41:47

Frankly, I don't see how it is possible. She had the baby in hospital surely? Don't you think the doctors would have noticed?

IndigoMoon Mon 01-Sep-08 16:43:40

http://photos-g.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-snc1/v318/187/21/1352505043/n1352505043703826301.jpg

this is a telling picture if it is real!

RubyRioja Mon 01-Sep-08 16:46:52

All the gossip could add up to her assuming motherhood, but equally surely a sitting governor of 45 (or whatever) who knew the baby has some health issues might well have kept quiet until she knew that pregnancy was well established or that she would continue with it.

is q unusual in this day and age, but very common in earlier times.

IndigoMoon Mon 01-Sep-08 16:47:38

photos-g.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-snc1/v318/187/21/1352505043/n1352505043_70382_6301.jpg

RubyRioja Mon 01-Sep-08 16:47:44

If part of beig secret plan, surely she woudl have enocurage daughter to dress more discreetly for posed photos and gone for more sweepling clothes herself?

georgimama Mon 01-Sep-08 16:48:49

What vile speculation. If it is true, it has happened plenty of times before and will again. It's no one's business but the family concerned.

Lying to protect her 17 year old hardly makes her a criminal, it makes her a mother.

I doubt it is true, considering that the child in question has Down Syndrome - I know it is possible for a 17 year old to have a Downs baby, but pretty unlikely, whereas a 45 year old is quite likely to have one.

dittany Mon 01-Sep-08 16:53:10

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FAQ Mon 01-Sep-08 16:54:09

georgimama - it's not that unlikely

Figures (approx)

Maternal age

The likelihood of having a baby with Down's syndrome increases with the mother's age:

20 years - 1 in 1,500
25 years - 1 in 1,300
30 years - 1 in 900
35 years - 1 in 350
40 years - 1 in 100
45 years - 1 in 30

so 1 in 1,500 not "that" a remote possibility.

dittany Mon 01-Sep-08 16:56:17

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

IndigoMoon Mon 01-Sep-08 16:56:32

acutally more down syndrome babies are born to younger women because they have more babies than an older age group.

georgimama Mon 01-Sep-08 16:57:15

I think it is probably a lot less than 1 in 1,500 for a 17 year old, though, as your figures show the risk increases massively which increasing maternal age. 1 in 1,500 is still a hell of a lot less than 1 in 30.

I agree with Dittany.

3andnomore Mon 01-Sep-08 16:58:49

erm in teh link OP posted it actually says the following:

"she also awoke yesterday to utterly unfounded internet rumours that her fifth child, born in April with Down’s syndrome, was actually her 17-year-old daughter’s."

so how does teh above mean that it is true?

StellaDallas Mon 01-Sep-08 17:00:59

Just nasty, nasty speculation.

FAQ Mon 01-Sep-08 17:01:07

dittany - have you read the other thread about this woman's ideas about the "world"?? Damn right I want it to be true - just to descredit her and lower the chances of them winning!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now