View Full Version : World's oldest mother gives birth to twins at 70
She was utterly determined to have a son.
The fact that to do so would make 70-year-old Omkari Panwar the world's oldest mother didn't even cross her mind.
Her resolve was matched by her husband Charan Singh Panwar, 77.
To pay for the IVF treatment vital to producing a male heir to the family's smallholdings, the retired farmer sold his buffalos, mortgaged his land, spent his life savings and took out a credit card loan.
And it all paid off when Mrs Panwar gave birth to twins - a boy and girl - by emergency Caesarean section in hospital in Muzaffarnagar, seven hours drive north of the Indian capital New Delhi.
The twins, born a month premature and weighing 2lb each, are healthy, according to doctors.
The Panwars already have two adult daughters, and five grandchildren, but the latest arrivals are what they have been waiting for - not least because a son will benefit from a dowry when he marries and will be able to work their land.
Mrs Panwar said: 'For eight months the pregnancy was hectic and painful. But I have given birth before, so I knew what to expect. Sometimes, you have to face the pain if you want something good.'
Her husband added: 'At last we have a son and heir. We prayed to God, went to saints and visited religious places to pray for an heir.
'The treatment cost me a fortune but the birth of a son makes it all worthwhile. I can die a happy man and a proud father.'
Wonders of science: The twins born to Omkari Panwar
Mrs Panwar, who has no birth certificate, uses the date of India's independence in 1947 to gauge her age. She remembers being nine when the British left India - meaning she is now 70.
Romanian Adriana Iliescu, who gave birth to a daughter through IVF aged 66 in 2005, was previously the world's oldest mother.
Mrs Panwar was told she had beaten the record as she recuperated on a rusty steel bed in the mudbrick home of one of her daughters.
'I didn't know that,' she said. 'But it is of little benefit to me. I have not even seen my own children yet - they were taken to a specialist hospital while I was still unconscious.
'If I am the world's oldest mother it means nothing to me. I just want to see my new babies and care for them while I am still able.'
Gynaecologist Nisha Malik, who delivered the twins in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, said: 'I was shocked when this old lady told me she was pregnant. I have been in medicine for 20 years and I have never heard of such a case.'
Omraki Panwar recovers in hospital after delivering her twin via Caesarean section
• Britain's oldest mother is child psychologist Patricia Rashbrook, who was 62 when she gave birth to a son in 2006. Dr Rashbrook had paid £10,000 for IVF treatment in Russia.
I think this is totally wrong. The poor children will probably grow up as orphans. And as for being able to work the land - will the father be able to pay back the mortgage and loans before he dies?
StarsOfCCTV
04-07-2008, 11:57
I agree this to me is completely wrong. Just to produce a male heir? Even though they know they might not live that long? That is incredibly selfish and unfair on those kids.
I agree! They keep getting older too
Chloe O'brien
05-07-2008, 00:56
The whole world has gone totally bonkers, what doctor allowed her to have this treatment. They will be lucky if they see the twins first birthday.
This is just getting ridiculous; 60 is unfair enough on the kids but 70 and a 77 year old father! The word orphan springs to mind for those twins before they're very old. There should be an upper age limit on this... and Doctors will allow that but not some women who are much younger and fit to bring up young children. These should be grateful they have daughters, when some women have no children and are desperate to have them. Reminds me of Henry VIII, really.
di marco
06-07-2008, 15:45
there was an article on msn about this and it said the man had said something about how he was glad he had a son cos he could support them in their old age! (cant remember exactly what it said) which i think is really stupid, how can a baby support anyone?! :rolleyes: the baby needs to be supported by the parents not the other way round!
StarsOfCCTV
06-07-2008, 17:01
cos he could support them in their old age! Erm....someone needs to point out to them they are already in their own age!
Irresponsible of them and the doctor who made it possible imo. :mad:
Irresponsible of them and the doctor who made it possible imo. :mad:
I agree, I mean yeah they may have wanted children and would make good parents but if they want to be good parents they need to put the child first and in this case they havent. I mean Im sure they are good parents in the sense of if they were younger and just in general, but to be honest at their age by doing this, they have ruined the childs childhood
Will they be able to play with him
Graduation?
Wedding?
Grandchildren?
If they live to over 100 well then okay
Exactly, Abbie. I seriously doubt that it will be possible, even with today's medical advances. Maybe in their twins' generation a lot more people will live to be over 100, but it isn't happening right now.
The female children they already have can't be expected to take care of the parents and the twins either.
Pinkbanana
08-07-2008, 22:50
I think this couple are totally selfish... aged 70 and 77 already then even if they are in good health, there's going to be limitations to what they can do...
'If I am the world's oldest mother it means nothing to me. I just want to see my new babies and care for them while I am still able.' Shame this selfish woman can't see the implications of being such an older mother. I do pity these children, and wonder who will end up being their main carers? :hmm:
StarsOfCCTV
08-07-2008, 23:11
Other family members I guess...but it's still not the same as their actual parents.
I give her until they start school, at which time they'll end up falling victim to bullying because of it. It isn't like either of them can run round after the children though or play a lot of games with them.
A 60-year-old woman in western Canada has given birth to twin boys after going to India for fertility treatment.
The Alberta Health Services issued a statement saying the mother and her babies were doing well.
First-time mother Ranjit Hayer said she had tried for decades to conceive naturally and with medical intervention. She said one effort in India failed when she and her husband paid a doctor for in-vitro fertilisation, but he absconded with their money.
They returned to Canada and again saved for years, the CBC reported, until they had enough money to go back to India and try again with donor eggs. The woman became pregnant with triplets, but one had to be terminated because of medical problems.
CBC said Mrs Hayer's two boys were delivered seven weeks prematurely by Caesarean section at Calgary's Foothills Hospital on Tuesday. Her obstetrician, Colin Birch told CBC there were social and ethical considerations beyond the medical ones.
"There's so much more involved in this," he said. "It's not just having the babies and being born. There's not just one generation gap here. There's two generation gaps."
Women who use fertility treatments to become mothers long past natural child-bearing years may not be acting in the best interests of their children, said Margaret Somerville, a medical ethicist from McGill University in Montreal. No-one had the right to interfere in natural conception, but ethics were different when medical advances were involved, she said.
"Society has both a right and a duty to put regulations around the use of these technologies. Those restrictions and rules should be fashioned from the perspective of what's in the best interest of any future child."
But a New Jersey woman who made headlines two years ago when she gave birth to twin boys at age 60, disagreed. Mother-of-four Frieda Birnbaum said she was never mistaken for a grandmother and believed she was ahead of a trend that would see older mothers accepted more as people tried to balance careers and children.
In 2006, a 67-year-old Spanish woman became the world's oldest mother after she gave birth to twins.
Not the oldest mother but I have to agree with the obstetrician. Not so sure about the comment from that mother of four either; she could well be saying that just to make herself look better after having children when it wasn't naturally possible.
The woman expecting to become Britain's oldest mother tried to have a child through IVF around five years ago, a friend said yesterday.
Elizabeth Adeney, 66, was left 'emotionally exhausted' by the process and considered giving up.
But she persevered after seeking advice and is now expecting her child - understood to be a son - weeks before her 67th birthday.
The friend said: 'Liz first failed to fall pregnant several years ago and only wanted to go through the process again if it was likely to work.
'She was really emotionally exhausted by it and she's a sensible woman, so she didn't want to face all that upset or risk health trouble unless she stood a good chance of having a baby.
'She had a long talk with a nurse friend of hers regarding her options and the complications that might be involved, given her age.
'Having consulted medical professionals, she was very positive about the whole thing.'
Mrs Adeney, of Lidgate, Suffolk, has brushed off criticism of her pregnancy.
The childless divorcee, who is still working a five-day week at the Suffolk plastic and textiles firm where she is managing director, said: 'I have young girls working for me in my factory and I'm fitter than half of them.
'It doesn't interest me that I'm going to be the oldest mum in the country. It's not my physical age that is important; it's how I feel inside. Some days, I feel 39. Others, I feel 56.'
She insisted she was not worried that she has no partner or siblings to support her.
'I'm perfectly capable of looking after myself,' she told a Sunday newspaper. 'I've done it for years.
'It will be just me and my baby. I know some people won't understand but I don't care.'
Mrs Adeney fell pregnant last year after receiving treatment in Ukraine. British clinics usually refuse to treat women over the age of 50.
Fertility expert Professor Severino Antinori, who treated Patti Farrant - Britain's previous oldest mother-tobe at age 62 - said yesterday he was 'shocked' at Mrs Adeney's case.
The Italian, who claims to have given IVF to 3,000 women aged between 49 and 63, said he would have refused to treat her for 'ethical reasons'.
'I do not treat women older than 63,' he said. 'I don't want the child to be left without a mother before they reach 20.'
The baby is expected to be delivered by caesarean section next week.
From Daily Mail
Why do the doctors never seem to consider the children when they give those old women the IVF treatment? Even if Mrs Adeney lives another 20 years, will she really be able to cope on her own with her child growing up through toddlerhood and the teenage years when she is in her sixties and seventies? I feel sorry for the kids, I believe their mothers are selfish, satisfying a need without considering the needs of a child. Just my opinion.
Aside from the child, what sort of stress is pregnancy going to put on her body at 66?
I do agree, 66 is too old to be having a child. If she wanted children so desperately she should have put her career on hold for a few years in her 40s.
Sure, she's hired a nanny but what about when the kid gets teased at school for having a parent so old? How is the child going to cope growing up without knowing it's father?
:sick: :sick: :sick: :sick: :sick: :sick:
Chloe O'brien
18-05-2009, 15:18
It's fine saying that she's doesn't need a man she can cope on her own, but what about when she falls ill and eventually dies the poor kid will be lucky to make it to high school before they are an orphan
I blame the doctors who make the pregnancies possible in the first place. I suppose they claim it is all in the name of science, sod the consequences for the poor little mites left orphaned. There is a reason nature has put infertility after a certain age into place. :angry:
I blame the doctors who make the pregnancies possible in the first place. I suppose they claim it is all in the name of science, sod the consequences for the poor little mites left orphaned. There is a reason nature has put infertility after a certain age into place. :angry:
Scientific experiments more like. 'Lets see how far we can push the boundaries'
Pinkbanana
18-05-2009, 19:20
I blame the doctors who make the pregnancies possible in the first place. I suppose they claim it is all in the name of science, sod the consequences for the poor little mites left orphaned. There is a reason nature has put infertility after a certain age into place. :angry:
Scientific experiments more like. 'Lets see how far we can push the boundaries'
It's just soooo wrong! I wonder what the children of these women will feel about it, when they are adults.... :hmm: I personally feel the doctors are playing God... and have they stopped to think of ALL the implications their meddling with nature will cause???! I think not.
di marco
18-05-2009, 19:59
seeing as she has never had any children i can understand why she might want one. however as shes so old i think its unfair on the child, she might think shes fit and healthy now and she might be and she might live to be over 100 but when youre old your health can deteriorate (sp?) pretty quickly so whos to say she wont be unfit/seriously ill/dead within less than 10yrs?
StarsOfCCTV
18-05-2009, 20:24
Have these people never heard of fostering/adoption? Who's going to look after these kids when they are gone?
My parents are older parents. Mum's 58, dads 69. Now on the one hand I am glad they are older, they are able to provide for me. However, realistically, I will lose them sooner than other people will, sadly. :(
But these people having kids at 60 or 70, what are they on?!
I see my parents struggle sometimes, my mum has long term health problem with arthritis and my dad's already had one hip replacement (although he is a gardener so his hips are more worn down than most) and he needs a special thing to put his socks on because he can't reach his feet anymore. (Although I add he still works quite a bit)
This woman may feel fit now, but in 10 years she won't! Its plain selfish, they are thinking of themselves and not the child.
The doctors who allow this have something seriously wrong with their moral and ethical compass!
StarsOfCCTV
18-05-2009, 20:26
Double post sorry
My parents were rather old when they adopted me and I have been the subject of a lot of bullying because of it - but they were the most kindest people you could meet, even if their view of the world seemed old fashioned at the time. But they were in their late forties, not sixties, and in those days, that was not so old.
Chloe O'brien
19-05-2009, 22:37
Why didn't she decided to have a baby even 20 years ago or adopt. No one is saying she has the right to become a parent just because of her age, but she must know that she will not see the child grow up.
I dont agree with them, but in a way I feel sorry for them. Sometimes I know this might sound odd but maybe they should talk to someone.
IMO wanting to have a child at that age is wrong to the child, its cruel and unfair and I dont understand how they cant see that, mayve they should talk to people cos they must see why its wrong
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.