A 67-year-old woman who is believed to be the world’s oldest new mother told a British Sunday newspaper she lied to a U.S. fertility clinic — saying she was 55 — to get treatment.
“Often circumstances put you between a rock and a hard place and maybe things shouldn’t have been done in the way they were done but that was the only way to achieve the thing I had always dreamed of and I did it,” she said.
Bousada turned 67 this month but said she told the Pacific Fertility Center in Los Angeles she was 55 — the clinic’s cut off for treating single women, the report said. She said the clinic did not ask her for identification.
The clinic apparently does check identity. Obviously not too well since she managed to deceive them so easily.
The twins, born seven weeks premature, remained in hospital for three weeks, but are now healthy and at home with Bousada, the report said. The retired department store employee lived with her elderly mother for her entire life in Cadiz, in southern Spain. She hatched her plan to have children after her mother died, at an unspecified age, in 2005, the newspaper said.
Bousada now hopes to find a younger husband to help raise her two sons, Pau and Christian, the newspaper said.
Presumably the younger husband would have to be prepared to bring them up single-handedly since the woman is a little short of 70 years old. Presumably the younger husband would also be aware that he’ll be little more than a nanny/breadwinner/provider, since the mother is retired. Or perhaps the money from the story will be set aside as a trust fund for the little boys.
Whatever, this simply beggars belief. Is there no limit to people’s self-centredness? Even stupid women like this one? Do the children count – for anything at all in this sorry tale?
World’s Oldest New Mother Lied to U.S Fertility Clinic
Family criticises 67-Year-Old Spanish Woman
Original story from Fox News, Associated Press London
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
any younger man should run like the very hounds of hell are after you,
this is the ultimate in selfishness, having these kids, then expecting someone else to look after them.. a lot children dont count these days, they are status symbols, a sort of look at me, i did good, when they should be focusing on the kids themselves.. these ivf companies make millions off these kind of people, so of course they wouldnt check it out, i wonder how much it cost her to hav those kids.
And some people have the gall to call us selfish for not having children?
I’m totally gobsmacked.
Not to mention the children could be left motherless even before they reach puberty. And the reason she had these children is?????
Selfish, selfish, selfish.
Unbelievably selfish! I second Rhea’s comment – I’m gobsmacked too! (That’s a great word.)
Yes, I too was gobsmacked when I read it. I think what this woman did is completely fuckwitted. In fact, it’s beyond fuckwittedness. No concern at all for those children. Only someone’s so-called, imagined “right” to have a child. Worse than selfish.
And you know we CF will be bingoed until we’re 70 now, about how we will/can always change our minds. We’ll never be free from it >:-(
I really hate IVF with a passion. The people who really want a kid, and can’t have one, should adopt. It is very selfish to just HAVE to have your own DNA replicant. And IVF on someone at that age is just even MORE rediculous. How come Xtians say abortion is playing God, but IVF is just great?
She’s retired? Assuming she’s on a fixed income, why did she think that money would be enough to raise a couple of kids? That’s beyond stupidity.
@Epona… yes, we will be faced with “well there’s still time to change your mind, now that women are able to have kids in their 50s/60s/70s… and good point on IVF… here of course we have the old double standard hard at work. If it’s to have a child it makes everything ok. An abortion to plan your family/protect the woman/any other reason is NOT o.k. But of course, we know that half of the flak that abortion gets is because a) the child must come first, meaning the woman is secondary, and b) because a woman can exert control over her own body and that control means the child will not come first.
@Hillari – never mind two kids. What about even one kid?? How can a single retired woman of nearly 70 afford to bring up even one kid? – Answer she can’t – hence she needs a wealthy young strapping lad to take care of it.