Cameron Diaz and Benji Madden welcome baby boy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hate that people assume just because someone is rich that it replaces their parents. Like who wants to be rich but have 70 year old parents to worry about in their 20s? No amount of wealth can replace healthy parents.

You’re lucky if you are healthy and even still alive in your 70s! Average life expectancy is average! Tens of millions of Americans die of cancer in their 40s 50s and 60s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Age is biological not psychological. Yes, babies with trust fund and surrogates and staff will be fine, only issue is normalizing it and 50 year olds risking their life and savings to birth babies with genetic disorders and then whole family dealing with the consequences forever.

They are not risking genetic disorders because obviously they are not using their own (50 year old) eggs.

Old age sperm?

does not matter
, Even if they use their own, during IVF, the embryos are genetically tested. Any that have problems are discarded.

This is not true. Virtually every couple we know with IVF babies had some health issues. Life threatening allergies, mild autism, heart defect, and/or born premature are very common.

I have 2 IVF babies that are late teens and have none of these issues. I’m sorry for your friends but that’s not the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Age is biological not psychological. Yes, babies with trust fund and surrogates and staff will be fine, only issue is normalizing it and 50 year olds risking their life and savings to birth babies with genetic disorders and then whole family dealing with the consequences forever.

They are not risking genetic disorders because obviously they are not using their own (50 year old) eggs.

Old age sperm?

does not matter
, Even if they use their own, during IVF, the embryos are genetically tested. Any that have problems are discarded.

This is not true. Virtually every couple we know with IVF babies had some health issues. Life threatening allergies, mild autism, heart defect, and/or born premature are very common.

A lot of these things are statistically more common with IVF babies. They are at much higher risk for still birth, birth defects, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Age is biological not psychological. Yes, babies with trust fund and surrogates and staff will be fine, only issue is normalizing it and 50 year olds risking their life and savings to birth babies with genetic disorders and then whole family dealing with the consequences forever.

They are not risking genetic disorders because obviously they are not using their own (50 year old) eggs.

Old age sperm?

does not matter
, Even if they use their own, during IVF, the embryos are genetically tested. Any that have problems are discarded.

This is not true. Virtually every couple we know with IVF babies had some health issues. Life threatening allergies, mild autism, heart defect, and/or born premature are very common.

A lot of these things are statistically more common with IVF babies. They are at much higher risk for still birth, birth defects, etc.

They are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hate that people assume just because someone is rich that it replaces their parents. Like who wants to be rich but have 70 year old parents to worry about in their 20s? No amount of wealth can replace healthy parents.

Such a strong word. Why not just be indifferent. Why do you care if Cameron Diaz has a baby at any age?

[Anonymous]

They bought a baby from a surrogate or arranged a private adoption.

I know families that adopted and they couldn’t post pics of the baby for a certain amount of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Age is biological not psychological. Yes, babies with trust fund and surrogates and staff will be fine, only issue is normalizing it and 50 year olds risking their life and savings to birth babies with genetic disorders and then whole family dealing with the consequences forever.

They are not risking genetic disorders because obviously they are not using their own (50 year old) eggs.

Old age sperm?

does not matter
, Even if they use their own, during IVF, the embryos are genetically tested. Any that have problems are discarded.

This is not true. Virtually every couple we know with IVF babies had some health issues. Life threatening allergies, mild autism, heart defect, and/or born premature are very common.

A lot of these things are statistically more common with IVF babies. They are at much higher risk for still birth, birth defects, etc.

They are not.

Come visit our publuc schools and take a look at classes for kids with special needs. Many of those children have older parents and IVF histories

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can never understand why rich people (of all people) can’t figure out how to have kids in their 30s. She had the money then to hire a surrogate. It makes not sense to put this off until the last minute. It’s not fair to the kids at all and we should not normalize this.

I agree. There was a quote earlier about her wanting to see her kids when they’re in their 40s. Can Cameron Diaz do math?? I know she plays ditzy blonds in movies, but didn’t realize she was so dense in real life.

IF she lives to her 90s, she may have dementia and Alzheimers and not even recognize her kids, which is sad. The kids will have to juggle raising their own children and taking care of very elderly parents who probably won’t be able to do anything for themselves. And since Cameron is loaded, that prolongs how long she can live in that sort of condition. Talk about stressful.

Wealthy celebrities who want kids should have them no later than early 40s, and that pushing it. Anything above 45+ is simply unfair to the children. I have no idea why rich people wouldn’t just have all their kids in their 20s/30s and be done with it. I’m 43 and my kid is graduating high school next year. I don’t know how old moms do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Age is biological not psychological. Yes, babies with trust fund and surrogates and staff will be fine, only issue is normalizing it and 50 year olds risking their life and savings to birth babies with genetic disorders and then whole family dealing with the consequences forever.

They are not risking genetic disorders because obviously they are not using their own (50 year old) eggs.

Old age sperm?

does not matter
, Even if they use their own, during IVF, the embryos are genetically tested. Any that have problems are discarded.

This is not true. Virtually every couple we know with IVF babies had some health issues. Life threatening allergies, mild autism, heart defect, and/or born premature are very common.

A lot of these things are statistically more common with IVF babies. They are at much higher risk for still birth, birth defects, etc.

They are not.

Come visit our publuc schools and take a look at classes for kids with special needs. Many of those children have older parents and IVF histories

Exactly. DC is the IVF capital of the West, so you always get senior parents on here coping, projecting, and spreading disinformation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can never understand why rich people (of all people) can’t figure out how to have kids in their 30s. She had the money then to hire a surrogate. It makes not sense to put this off until the last minute. It’s not fair to the kids at all and we should not normalize this.

I agree. There was a quote earlier about her wanting to see her kids when they’re in their 40s. Can Cameron Diaz do math?? I know she plays ditzy blonds in movies, but didn’t realize she was so dense in real life.

IF she lives to her 90s, she may have dementia and Alzheimers and not even recognize her kids, which is sad. The kids will have to juggle raising their own children and taking care of very elderly parents who probably won’t be able to do anything for themselves. And since Cameron is loaded, that prolongs how long she can live in that sort of condition. Talk about stressful.

Wealthy celebrities who want kids should have them no later than early 40s, and that pushing it. Anything above 45+ is simply unfair to the children. I have no idea why rich people wouldn’t just have all their kids in their 20s/30s and be done with it. I’m 43 and my kid is graduating high school next year. I don’t know how old moms do it.

Two celeb women in early 40s with young kids with late stage cancer this week. Your friends start dropping like flies in your 40s and 50s. It’s terrifying. Kids need parents! It is so selfish and narcissistic for these disgusting rich celebs to buy babies and wombs from underclass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Age is biological not psychological. Yes, babies with trust fund and surrogates and staff will be fine, only issue is normalizing it and 50 year olds risking their life and savings to birth babies with genetic disorders and then whole family dealing with the consequences forever.

They are not risking genetic disorders because obviously they are not using their own (50 year old) eggs.

Old age sperm?

does not matter
, Even if they use their own, during IVF, the embryos are genetically tested. Any that have problems are discarded.

This is not true. Virtually every couple we know with IVF babies had some health issues. Life threatening allergies, mild autism, heart defect, and/or born premature are very common.

A lot of these things are statistically more common with IVF babies. They are at much higher risk for still birth, birth defects, etc.

They are not.

Come visit our publuc schools and take a look at classes for kids with special needs. Many of those children have older parents and IVF histories

Exactly. DC is the IVF capital of the West, so you always get senior parents on here coping, projecting, and spreading disinformation.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do 50+ women who use surrogates typically use their own eggs?

Sometimes. Also, sometimes they had frozen them before or even have frozen embryos. However, this is all speculation regarding Cameron.

Freezing eggs only became really reliable about 13 years ago, so it's unlikely that someone now 50 would have saved viable eggs, though soon that will have been possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Their kids are not fine. Look up their outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Age is biological not psychological. Yes, babies with trust fund and surrogates and staff will be fine, only issue is normalizing it and 50 year olds risking their life and savings to birth babies with genetic disorders and then whole family dealing with the consequences forever.

They are not risking genetic disorders because obviously they are not using their own (50 year old) eggs.

Old age sperm?

does not matter
, Even if they use their own, during IVF, the embryos are genetically tested. Any that have problems are discarded.

This is not true. Virtually every couple we know with IVF babies had some health issues. Life threatening allergies, mild autism, heart defect, and/or born premature are very common.

A lot of these things are statistically more common with IVF babies. They are at much higher risk for still birth, birth defects, etc.

They are not.

Come visit our publuc schools and take a look at classes for kids with special needs. Many of those children have older parents and IVF histories

How would public school teachers or administrators know a child’s IVF status? How would that ever come up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50 is the new 30

Oh hell no! I’m 54, very fit and active. I have an 18-year old and 16-year one and would not want a baby/toddler at my age.

Being a close to 70-year old mom at your kid’s high school graduation doesn’t sound appealing.

Jane Seymour, Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Teigs, Donna Mills, all had children in their 50s. All of these kids are now grown up many Ivy League educated and doing just fine. Age is a construct and fluid. It is a mindset.

Actually age is not a construct nor is it fluid. It's factual.