Natalie Portman is pregnant with baby #3!
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Wow. She’s 44. Congrats I guess? |
Anonymous
| Geez, OP, at least link an article so we don't have to Google. Who is the baby daddy? I haven't kept up with her love life after her divorce. |
Anonymous
| She's 44?? I always thought she was 10 years older. |
Anonymous
|
OP here. I saw it on people.com
https://people.com/natalie-portman-is-pregnant-expecting-baby-no-3-first-with-tanguy-destable-11952584 |
Anonymous
I mean, she was a child star and has been in the business forever |
Anonymous
| its sad that she chose to bring a new child into the world in a single parent unmarried household, very unresponsible |
Anonymous
I think she'll be able to raise the child just fine |
Anonymous
|
I wish TMZ would go back to covering celebrity news like this. People we have generally all heard of, and happier things.
They seem to always cover influencers who get arrested or killed now. Anyway, she's with a guy named Tan Guy? And there'll be a 9 or 10 year gap between her second and third kids. |
Anonymous
|
She's either had her eggs on ice for awhile or it's someone else's egg (bab
We could probably cure cancer with all the medical research and $$$ spent on creating vanity babies to validate second marriages (ahem, relationships) . |
Anonymous
| good for her! |
Anonymous
|
Happy for her but I will say, I felt great at 44. Perimenopause symptoms hit me at 48. And I just can’t imagine having a four-year-old then.
I know Natalie had a lot of resources, but some things you just like to do yourself as a mom. It just sounds very exhausting. I do feel like there’s a reason biologically most women are done having kids by about 40. |
Anonymous
It definitely happens naturally. My MIL had her 4th and 5th baby at 42 and 44. I know a handful of women who become pregnant between 40-45 naturally |
Anonymous
We need to stop pretending celebrity fantasy stories are real life guidance. For ordinary people, the smart and realistic plan is to have children before 30 if possible, not gamble on wealth based exceptions in the 40s and then market them as empowerment. These glossy headlines are shamefully dishonest because they hide the machinery behind them: frozen eggs, IVF, donor eggs, surrogacy, private doctors, planned surgeries, nannies, night nurses, trainers, chefs, and unlimited money. Then the public is told, "See, 44 is the new normal." No, it is not. For most women, biology is not a PR campaign. Fertility declines with age. Risks rise. Energy changes. Recovery gets harder. That is reality. Having children earlier generally means: Better natural fertility odds Lower miscarriage risk Lower rates of chromosomal abnormalities Lower pregnancy complication risk Easier recovery on average More stamina for newborn and toddler years Being younger and healthier as your child grows By contrast, pushing late motherhood as some carefree trend is irresponsible. Many women later discover that fertility treatment is expensive, emotionally draining, not guaranteed, and sometimes unsuccessful. Those painful realities rarely make the magazine cover. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recognizes higher age related pregnancy risk beginning at 35, with risks increasing further into the 40s. That is medicine, not judgment. No one is attacking women who have children later. Life happens. But glamorizing rare celebrity outcomes while hiding the truth is unfair and harmful. Society should be honest: if you want the best biological odds and lowest overall risk, aim to have your children before 30 when possible, not after decades of delay and wishful thinking. |
Anonymous
He's French 
|
Anonymous
| Her dad's a fertility doctor. |