72-year-old woman becomes first time mom thanks to IVF

[Jesus Malverde]

Source: SF GATE

A 72-year old woman in India became a first time mom thanks to a controversial fertility clinic that helps women well-past menopause age become pregnant through in vitro fertilization.

Whether or not new mom Daljinder Kaur is the oldest woman ever to give birth remains to be seen, as she's not really sure how old she is. Kaur says she is seven years younger than her husband, who is 79. The two have been married for 49 years, and have remained childless - until now.

"We will raise him and give him a proper education," Kaur told the Telegraph. "I had faith in Almighty that I will have my own baby, and Waheguru answered my prayers.&quot Waheguru is the Sikh term for God.)

After spotting an advertisement from the The National Fertility and Test Tube Baby Centre in Hisar, India, Kaur and her husband began to visit the clinic. With the help of their team at the clinic, the couple has been trying to conceive since 2013, and endured two failed IVF attempts before becoming pregnant last July. The fertility clinic has come under fire for encouraging older women to have babies.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/72-year-old-becomes-first-time-mom-thanks-to-IVF-7444457.php

[houston16revival]

1. Does the baby

inherit extra wisdom from its septuagenarian mother?

[Nihil]

46. Given that mother's decisions, the answer would clearly be "No".

What a sick & disgustingly selfish pair of individuals (and what a tragic orphan in waiting).

[Doctor_J]

2. And if the parents live a normal life expectancy, the boy will be an orphan at age eight

This act seems rather selfish

[MissDeeds]

4. I agree

Great for her, not so much for the child.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

8. And if they live a much longer life

the child will be caring for them as a teenager and young man. Even with wealth, someone in the family has to be in charge.

[Xithras]

31. Based on "normal" life expectancy, the kid will be on borrowed time from its birth.

The average life expectancy in INDIA is 63.5 years. The average life expectancy in Haryana, the state where this couple lives, is 66.2. Factor in the gender gap in life expectancy in India, and the average woman is dead before her 68th birthday.

The HIGHEST average life expectancy in India is among women in Kerala, which is just short of 78 years old. That would make the kid an orphan at eight...but they don't live anywhere near Kerala.

[wordpix]

43. My grandpa remarried late & fathered a baby at 70

He died a few years later. Baby grew into a fine young man. Luckily wife #2 had lots of family and our side took him under wing, too.

[Boxerfan]

3. Ghad what a horrid idea...

I can't imagine any ethical physician performing the IVF on a elderly patient....

The other implications are un fathomable from a caring person-They are selfish & stupid-and sadly cruel to a possible life.

[Old Vet]

37. Exactly what I was thinking,

[FLPanhandle]

5. Who would want to die when their child is so young?

Sorry to be so judgmental, but these seem like very selfish people. More concerned about what they want instead of what's best for a child.

Pathetic people.

[JI7]

6. in India ? why not adopt ?

This is just bizarre to do it in a country with such high population .

[irisblue]

10. Indian laws do not allow an adoption if the parents are older then 45

I learned that from the BBC interview with the attending physician. I imagine the laws have not caught up with IVF yet.

[Blue_Tires]

47. But they've been married 49 years?

perhaps they might have tried when they were still in their 30s?

Or does the baby not count if it isn't their genes?

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

7. Her body. And selfish.

Selfish. Selfish. Selfish. Selfish.

It's bad enough when an older guy has a child with a younger wife, but at least that child will likely grow up with one parent.

This is beyond lunacy, and should be against the law. I don't care what anyone says. It should be against the law.

[smirkymonkey]

9. Great, the poor kid is going to be stuck caring for elderly parents before he will

even be old enough to drive. These people are selfish idiots. Did they actually think this through?

[valerief]

22. Sure they did. Me me me me me me me me me and finally mini me. You know, same as all the 72-yr-old

fathers that have ALWAYS been around. We now have more of them thanks to Viagra.

[PersonNumber503602]

11. That seems a bit selfish.

I hope they're at least wealthy so they can hire nannies and whatever else.

[Nye Bevan]

12. I wouldn't want to be 94 years old going to my kid's college graduation (nt)

[beveeheart]

13. I am a healthy 72 and I cannot imagine

caring for a baby at my age.

[Egnever]

14. Sheesh and I thought I started late.

[whistler162]

15. Well Tony Randall fathered two

children after the age of 75. 'Though his second wife was much younger when she gave birth.

[Liberal_in_LA]

23. And died when they were young

[Crowman1979]

16. Patton Oswalt mentioned this in one of his stand-up shows.

Science: We're all about coulda, not shoulda!

[Vinca]

17. She must be nuts.

[Elmergantry]

18. Now, now

Lets not be moralizing....stop being so judgmental.

....If it makes you happy, it cant be that bad...

[wordpix]

44. Trump voters feel the same

[Marrah_G]

19. I think she is selfish

There is a very good chance the child will be either an orphan or nursing his elderly parents before he can even vote.

[Bayard]

36. Maybe that's what they had in mind

To have a built in caregiver, and someone to leave their fortune to.

[alarimer]

20. I can't recall any man who fathered children at that age being called selfish.

Don't the same rules apply? i mean, the kid would (presumably) have to care for an elderly father.

The criticism seems a big strong and pretty sexist.

[FLPanhandle]

24. No it's not sexist, it's because both parents are old

If she was having a child with a 35 year old man, then the child wouldn't be a orphan before leaving elementary school.

[LanternWaste]

29. I'd rationalize it as such too if my bias depended on it.

I'd rationalize it as such too if my bias depended on it. No doubt, we all like to pretend we know what's best for others... and no doubt, we'll justify it as absurdly as possible to prevent the possibility that we're not as clever as we pretend to be.

[FLPanhandle]

33. No rationalization needed.

There is no rationalization required to observe the fact the child will be an orphan at an early age.

Your post says more your thought process when confronted with that simple fact.

[forkol]

35. Agreed.

How do we know it's not these younger wives that want the child?

I actually think that's the case more often than not. If they really didn't want a baby, then I think they know how to NOT have one. Hell, they can even lie!

"Uh, I can't seem to get pregnant. Could it be because of your age, honey?"

[Throd]

34. I think the same rules apply.

I can think of lots of male celebrities who had children past their 60's. I always considered them selfish.

[Marrah_G]

41. It's because both parents are so old that it is selfish

[zalinda]

25. Maybe I am the only one who has a different take on this situation

Yes, I think it's selfish, but for a different reason. We don't need another child in this world. If they are wealthy enough to afford to have IVF, they are wealthy enough to travel to another country and adopt, if it is not allowed in India.

We need more people on this planet like we need another hole in our head. I know that there are some women who are so fertile that it becomes almost impossible, in the past. My mother could name each failed birth control method with each of her 6 kids, until the birth control pill was developed and she was done with child bearing. Today there is no reason why someone should have 19 or more kids and be celebrated for it. The days of having a lot of kids in the hopes of a couple of them making it to adulthood is long past.

Z

[Silver_Witch]

27. This! And super this!

[hamsterjill]

38. I agree with your post.

How wonderful would it have been had they adopted a needy child? Perhaps an older child.

No, I don't think that someone having 19 or more kids should be celebrated.

[Delphinus]

40. Ooh,

I should have read this before posting - I totally agree with you!

[wordpix]

45. +10000 exactly ^^^^

[peace13]

26. She better hang tough!won't be easy going to a parent teacher conference at 89!

Not sure this was well thought out but thankfully it's not my life to decide.

[KansDem]

30. But just think...

She'll be 90 when she attends her child's high-school graduation!

[enid602]

28. I'm not sure she'll be up for the demands of rearing a child

if she's not even sure how old she is.

[WhiteTara]

32. Sounds like a recipe for a tragedy.

Baby orphaned at an early age and an exhausted new mother in her 70s.

[Delphinus]

39. Why?

Just why?

[The2ndWheel]

42. Humans don't like limits