My feed

to access all these features


67 and having Twins!

43 replies

Furball · 31/12/2004 20:24

Blimey what is the world comming to Here! Quite sad for the children having such an old mum, when they are 13 their mum will be 80.

OP posts:
Frizbe · 31/12/2004 20:27

I read it earlier, scarey.....

MarsLady · 31/12/2004 20:27


WideWebWitch · 31/12/2004 20:28

And I thought I was old. Blimey.

lockets · 31/12/2004 20:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

paolosgirl · 31/12/2004 20:32

I think it's wrong, sorry.

aloha · 31/12/2004 20:33

Made me feel quite ill. I wonder what the egg donor thinks about her eggs going into someone that old? I think the doctors should be ashamed, frankly.

MarsLady · 31/12/2004 20:35

apparently they were her own eggs.

aloha · 31/12/2004 20:36

Yeah, right! Sorry, but no, at 67 they won't have been. Nobody is fertile naturally at 67.

lockets · 31/12/2004 20:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

aloha · 31/12/2004 20:38

And the Sun is wrong. You can't delay the menopause. It's medically impossible. HRT does NOT delay the menopause and prolong fertility - it just means taking artificial hormones that make it feel as if you aren't menopausal. But you still are!

MarsLady · 31/12/2004 20:38

she had hormone treatment for years to delay menopause. have to stop thinking about this, making me feel rather sick.

don't know how she's gonna have the energy for twins. my DTs are 10 months old and I've been knackered for months and I'm nowhere near her age!

aloha · 31/12/2004 20:49

There is no such thing as hormone treatment to delay the menopause. I promise you this is true! Otherwise they would offer it to all those poor women who have a premature menopause - sometimes as early is in their 20s. This 'treatment' does not exist. What this woman had was donor eggs. The oldest woman in the world to concieve naturally was in her fifties. I do not buy for one single second that this woman was still naturally fertile at 67.

wheresmyfroggy · 31/12/2004 20:51

Could they have been her own eggs frozen?

fuzzywuzzy · 31/12/2004 21:22

Why would she want to put her body through this at that age???

bluemoon · 31/12/2004 21:32

It's utterly selfish of her. All the things that happen to one after age 60 in terms of health and energy etc. are not things that very small children should have to go through with a 'parent.' My father was 57 when I was born and he died when I was 10. Everyone thought he was my grandfather when he was alive and his health was awful from when I was 5 years old. It didn't matter so much because I had my mum who was in her 30's but if he had been my only parent it would have been very difficult and he was 10 years younger than her!

MrsBigDrumsADrumming · 31/12/2004 22:33

I can but shudder at the idea! Poor kids!
my mum is 66 in a few days and pretty fit and in good health but the thought of somebody her age going through pregnancy and having babies...

why???? the mind boggles! To make the news? Guess with all the publicity and payoffs she will be able to get help with the kids, but that's NOT the point!

kkgirl · 31/12/2004 22:39


I'm forty five with 8 1/2 year old twins, and can barely cope. After a day with them and their mentor aged 11, I am shattered, my nerves are jarring, and I dream of the days when they will go out with their friends, if only for an hour or two. This woman won't be able to cope with the pregnancy, let alone after their birth. She must be nuts!!!!

Caligulights · 31/12/2004 23:55

Some doctors will simply do anything for money.

biglips · 31/12/2004 23:56

yeah i thought that was terrible as by the time they are 18, mother will 85 !!

emmatmg · 01/01/2005 00:40

I think it's disgusting TBH. selfish and disgusting.

Gobbledigook · 01/01/2005 00:43

Emma, if dh turned round when you were 67 and said 'go on then, lets have another' you'd do it! You know you would!

Nah, it's yucksville imo but once again I've had far too much plonk and must go to bed before getting meself into more strife!

Night all!


aloha · 01/01/2005 08:47

where'smyfroggy - no, it couldn't be. The technology is very new and didn't exist when this woman was young enough to have it done (ie before 40).
Definitely NOT her eggs, and just think, if there was a treatment that delayed the menopause and prolonged fertility, everybody would be having it!


Don’t want to miss threads like this?


Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

DoesntChristmasDragOn · 01/01/2005 08:59

The Times said it was donor eggs.

I think it's wrong but good luck to her. She'll need it.

winterwarmmummer · 01/01/2005 09:07

Yuck, yuck, yuck..... Not a nice story at all. If she wanted children that badly why did she not try to have them when she was naturally (agewise) able to???

Maybe this story isn't quite as genuine as the papers would have us believe. Or at least that's what I'm hoping.

aloha · 01/01/2005 09:07

I think good luck to her kids. They'll need it too. We are 'older parents' at 41 and 46, but too deliberately make yourself a single parent at 67 is postively obscene and selfish to be honest.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.