Posted on 11/11/2004 5:21:30 PM PST by sassbox
A 59-year-old great-grandmother is pregnant with twins and will deliver next month, three decades after she had her tubes tied. "They came untied," Frances Harris (search) said Thursday.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
You still make no sense. You condemn a woman for ACCIDENTLY becoming pregnant(And you are COMPLETELY wrong, there is a lot of evidence of fallopian tubes healing up)who is keeping her babies and is planning to raise them with the babies' father, yet you think it is fine for a 57 year old to have babies ON PURPOSE WITHOUT a father.
Doctors actually tell you that this is a possibility. I think the lady is just in awe that this is happening to her but her and hubby are going to take care of the kids.
I think in Nopardons world you must be rich and from the city to be acceptable. But then we must remember, maybe we did not fully comprehend the real meaning of the posts(ha ha) not!!
I haven't "condemned" anyone.It is rare for fallopian tubes to regenerate.It is strange,peculiar,even eyebrow raising for people to divorce and still have sexual relations;not to mention off putting.And I never claimed that a 59 year old divorcee having twins via IVF was "fine".
I make far more sense than YOU ever shall. LOL
That masters degree is really showing off. Don't take it personal, just be a bit more clear. Mean what you post and post what you mean.
So post 16 and 29 were just a joke?
I think you must be kidding or pulling a joke with your fellow freepers. You said it's unusual for divorced people to have sex with each other? Do you believe that or was that a joke to stir up the boards?
You were defending the woman who got the IVF. She is deliberately depriving her children of a father. THAT is "horrific", not a woman who is planning to keep her babies and raise them in a stable home.
"Stable"? There is no guarantee that this couple will stay married now.After all,they obviously didn't turn a hair at divorcing before. And all of these aged baby machines are doing a disservice to their children;some more willfully than others.
I said what I meant and if anyone is attempting to stir the pot...it is you. :-)
You married a 15 year old? How old were you ?
No. She was 14 and I was 19.
Though we will be married 39 years next August and have had a good and happy marriage and love each other very much we certainly don't recommend it as a norm. No we didn't have to.
Actually we really never had a date as you would call it. I know it's strange. Seemed right at the time, so far so good.
Had been engaged to a girl my own age for about a year and a half who wasn't near as mature as my wife, if you can call any one that age mature including myself.
Had two friends in the same city high school who grew up together next door from the time they where toddlers who got married in the eleventh grade at sixteen.
They finished high school and he was already working as most of us back then where and eventually opened his own successful business that they had planned in high school and they still have today.
They've been married 41 years. I guess maybe people where little different back then with different expectations. I don't know.
Congratulation on finding the woman of your dreams so early in life.
Since most people are not able to clearly understand your posts, what did you mean in 16 and 29?
Back then,most early marriages took place after high school.And yes,I know some people who did that.
I got married in '67,and yes,we were older than you and your wife, when we got married.We're happily married and looking forward to celebrating our 38th wedding anniversary next spring.
As to expectations...I think people did have different expectations,regarding marriage,back then.
So you wrote something that was unclear, I asked for clarification, and you don't want to respond? Okay, your choice but..sounds fishy to me. I don't know..maybe you changed your mind- or maybe you realized it did not make sense.
Wow. She sure is going to be a busy lady!
"Old parents,of any sex,do these children a disservice,IMO.It's a selfish act and one which serves ONLY those adults.These people are far too old to raise children and yes,those children will suffer."
I don't think that is necessarily true. I have a good friend who's dad had her when he was 67 and yes, he did die when she was a freshman in high school...But he was the best father she could have ever asked for. He was a well respected Pediatrician in our city, and a great man, unselfish indeed. She did not suffer with him as her father.
My writing is clear.That you are incapable of comprehending what is written ,is your problem.Except,it's really that you don't LIKE what I wrote,isn't it,rather than demanding clarification thereof. ;^)
Okay,chew on this...henceforth and here after,there will NEVER be a reply of mine,to you,that you shall be able to decipher and yes,it will be on purpose. :-)
I'm the seventh child of my parents. The doctor told my mother eight years previous not to worry she couldn't have anymore children. She was 51 when I started the first grade.
No one every had better parents than me.
My wife comes from a family of ten who's father died at forty three leaving her mother with a pile of kids. She's 80 now and lives with us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.