STORM2K

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- A 63-year-old British hospital consultant is set to become one of the world's oldest mothers after undergoing fertility treatment, the Italian doctor who treated her said on Thursday.

Patricia Rashbrook, a child psychologist from Lewes, East Sussex, was given in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment last October, Severino Antinori told Reuters.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/05 ... index.html

oh my....i wouldn't want to be waking up at all hours of the night to feed a baby at that age! She sure does look good for her age.

I wouldn't want to spend my retirement years starting all over raising a new baby. I probably wouldn't see it graduate.

Worse yet.. I child has to grow up with folks on Metamucil and crutches.. I think this is a bit late.. Her life expectancy will not be long enough for it to become an adult That is irresponsible and highly selfish...

Aquawind wrote:Worse yet.. I child has to grow up with folks on Metamucil and crutches.. I think this is a bit late.. Her life expectancy will not be long enough for it to become an adult That is irresponsible and highly selfish...

I agree fully!!!

Also, that poor child might have to take care of the parents when it is in it's teens. Knowing John and my health conditions, diabetes and all and right now we are younger than her. Just think what Our conditon with be in 15 years. The baby will not be babysitting it's siblings. It will be babysitting it's parents.

CajunMama wrote:oh my....i wouldn't want to be waking up at all hours of the night to feed a baby at that age! She sure does look good for her age.

She must use bowflex.


I Agree with the comments above.

Wow! That gives me some hope.. good for her and she sure looks great for 63 years old! I wish her well and hope she has a healthy and happy baby.

There is no way I would want to be tied down to a baby at that age. I would want to be retired and hopefully traveling. And she won't be able to do a whole lot with her kid. Especially if it is a boy and he wants to play ball or other active things. She will never be able to keep up.

I am 36 and don't want to be pregnant again. I can't even begin to imagine 63.

People have menopause for a reason.

What's this lady going to do when this kid's a teenager? Will she still be alive? Is she going to be able to be there for him/her when she's needed? Besides, what about when the kid needs near constant attention, is she going to have the energy to do so?

Nothing wrong with procreation, but please think first.

Well it isn't as if she got pregnant by accident. She obviously has thought about it and had IVF. I'm sure that child will get more love and attention than most kids. My Mom is 83 and still works!!!!! Which means she could have had a child at 63 and raised it just fine. I say good for her.

I know young people who are TERRIBLE parents. If she can provide for the child and gives the baby love, what is so wrong with it? I would have given my right arm to have a child. So I can sympathize with how the woman feels.

You are so right there. She could be in way greater shape then any of us women here. She may also have the means for help if she needs it and family support.

Well I know some people who are raising their grandkids at that age, so it not that much different. The doctors told me that I might not be able to have a baby easily either because of suspected endometrios. Personally, I would not do it that old. But, if it is her life dream to have a baby, then go for it. She looks terrific for being 63! I never would of guessed she would of been a day over 40! I hope I look like that at that age!

Unfortunately at her age, there's a much higher risk of a birth defect. The risk of having a baby with Down Syndrome at age 25 is only 1 out of 1100. By age 35, it jumps to 1 out of 350. By age 40, it's 1 out of 100. If you're pregnant at age 45 or older, the risk is 1 in 25. I'm not sure how much it's increased if you're 63, but that risk is certainly high.

I don't agree with her choice to have a baby at that age, but I hope and pray it will be healthy.

southerngale wrote:Unfortunately at her age, there's a much higher risk of a birth defect. The risk of having a baby with Down Syndrome at age 25 is only 1 out of 1100. By age 35, it jumps to 1 out of 350. By age 40, it's 1 out of 100. If you're pregnant at age 45 or older, the risk is 1 in 25. I'm not sure how much it's increased if you're 63, but that risk is certainly high.

I don't agree with her choice to have a baby at that age, but I hope and pray it will be healthy.

I think the egg was donated.

True, she does have a higher risk of birth defects than a 30 year old. But then the same is true for these young kids who go get pregnant and then drink and do drugs WHILE they are pregnant. Bottom line is this baby will be loved no matter what. That is a good thing.

Now, with this being said, if I COULD have a child would I do it at my age (45). No, I would not. I am too set in my ways at this point in time. When my maternal instincts kick in, I spend time my MANY great nieces and/or nephews. I am the favorite aunt, they all think I am cool The good thing about that is I can give 'em back

And you definitely ARE cool!!!!!

Pburgh wrote:And you definitely ARE cool!!!!!

That must be because you and I are sister's right? Runs in the family