New Father at 68 (teenager, accidents, daughter, grandmother)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't understand why people are bringing young dads into this discussion, like it is an either/or thing. Young dads, deadbeat dads have nothing to do with this discussion. We're talking about a 68 year old and a 56? year old purposely making a baby. So what if they have money? Money is nice but it isn't a substitute for living parents. So the kid has adult siblings who could step in...maybe they don't want to. A responsible person wouldn't put that burden on his adult children.
People are bringing young dads into this discussion because your father IS either old or not...the comparison DOES need to be be made as it shows a glaring discrimination based solely on the mans age.....the rest is really all about "what ifs"...the child could be well into the 20's before it looses a parent....saying that adult siblings may or may not need to step in is irrelavent...and the burden is only an assumption at best.
People are bringing young dads into this discussion because your father IS either old or not...the comparison DOES need to be be made as it shows a glaring discrimination based solely on the mans age.....the rest is really all about "what ifs"...the child could be well into the 20's before it looses a parent....saying that adult siblings may or may not need to step in is irrelavent...and the burden is only an assumption at best.
No, the assumption is being made that young dads can't afford to have kids or will just leave anyway. It's not like those are the only choices - old and rich or young and poor. I don't call this "discrimination" based only on his age. It is a FACT that people get old and die. It is a fact that this child could not have been conceived naturally. No one is saying he won't be a good dad, only that he might not be around for very long.
Robert De Niro is 68 years old and a surrogate just delivered another baby for him a few days ago. He will be 86 before this child becomes an adult. I would love to be able to say 'Congrats on the new baby", but I am having a hard time of it with this one. I feel (remember I said feel) that at that age it is very selfish to keep having kids. There is a very good chance that this child's father won't be alive to see her graduate from High School much less college.
Does anyone else feel that 68 is just too old to have a baby?
Yep. It's the height of selfishness and an overly inflated sense of self-importance. I feel sorry for the kid.
Yep. It's the height of selfishness and an overly inflated sense of self-importance. I feel sorry for the kid.
I don't feel any more sorry for this kid than I do for any other hollywood stars kids....the child will be born with a silver spoon in his mouth, like sooo many before him.....De'Niro may be an excellant dad, and give the child an excellant start in life...what's wrong with that?....I can't feel sorry for a kid that can say that Robert De Niro is his dad.
I don't feel any more sorry for this kid than I do for any other hollywood stars kids....the child will be born with a silver spoon in his mouth, like sooo many before him.....De'Niro may be an excellant dad, and give the child an excellant start in life...what's wrong with that?....I can't feel sorry for a kid that can say that Robert De Niro is his dad.
There is no reason to have had this kid other than they wanted one. the risks outweigh the benefits. They are already parents. They already have a child together. They put their wants ahead of the child's best interest. That is selfish. A parent owes a child more than an excellent "start" in life. Time will tell if that start is one year, 5 years, or 20 years. Life expectancy stats indicate this kid will have around 10 years with his dad. Really nice. Purposely create a child that will likely live through the death of a parent around 10 years old. There is no way to spin that into a responsible choice.
There is no reason to have had this kid other than they wanted one. the risks outweigh the benefits. They are already parents. They already have a child together. They put their wants ahead of the child's best interest. That is selfish. A parent owes a child more than an excellent "start" in life. Time will tell if that start is one year, 5 years, or 20 years. Life expectancy stats indicate this kid will have around 10 years with his dad. Really nice. Purposely create a child that will likely live through the death of a parent around 10 years old. There is no way to spin that into a responsible choice.
I can't say I disagree with this, but speaking as someone who's father died at 35 (while my mother was pregnant with me) I can say that having a dad for 1, 5, or 10 years is better than not having one at all. And having a dad who wanted and loved you and died when you were young is better than having a dad who is living and wants nothing to do with you. Of course, the ideal situation for every child would be to have two parents who planned, wanted, and are willing to care for and love their child, and who will live long enough to do so. But not every situation is ideal. I don't think having a baby at 68 is a smart move, but I don't see it as being the worst thing either.
I agree AnnaNomus...you're right...it's no where near being the worst thing that could happen.....and rkb0305..what other reason IS there for having a kid...other than you want one???How can you possibly know a child's best interest if you don't have one???Wanting to have, and love a child is NOT selfish.....but denying someone else like De Niro that same joy, just because he's an older man really IS selfish....for this couple this IS a responsible choice....and I stand in admiration, and wish DeNiro and his wife the best.
I agree AnnaNomus...you're right...it's no where near being the worst thing that could happen.....and rkb0305..what other reason IS there for having a kid...other than you want one???How can you possibly know a child's best interest if you don't have one???Wanting to have, and love a child is NOT selfish.....but denying someone else like De Niro that same joy, just because he's an older man really IS selfish....for this couple this IS a responsible choice....and I stand in admiration, and wish DeNiro and his wife the best.
Well, I'm not going to continue to argue my point. I stand by what I've said so far. I think it was a stupid decision. I didn't say it was the worst thing ever. I didn't say he's going to be a bad father. I said he's likely to die when the kid is not very old. That is a fact, and an important consideration when make the decision to have a child. Apparently that wasn't an important factor to him and his wife.
I would rather have a Dad who was 68, and wanted me, than a Dad who was 16, and did not a baby.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
