60-Year-Old Woman Gives Birth To Twins
N.J. Psychologist Says She Wants Women To Feel Empowered To Pursue Goals Despite Age
-
Play CBS Video
Video
60-Year-Old Woman Gives Birth
Frieda Birnbaum delivered twin boys at 60 years old, making her the oldest woman to give birth in the U.S. She tells Hannah Storm that she hopes her experience empowers other women.
-
Photo
Frieda Birnbaum, with husband Ken, who at age 60 delivered twin boys, appearing on The Early Show. (CBS)
-
Quiz
Bundle Of Joy
Can pregnant women change cat litter? And is it safe for them to drink diet soda? Take Dr. Mallika Marshall's quiz and find out.
-
Interactive
Twins: Separated At Birth
Find out more about the similarities and differences of twins separated at birth.
Frieda Birnbaum gave birth to "Baby A" at 12:44 p.m. and "Baby B" a minute later by Caesarean section at Hackensack University Medical Center, hospital spokeswoman Nancy Radwin said. The twins each weighed 4 pounds, 11 ounces, she said.
Birnbaum told CBS' The Early Show co-anchor Hannah Storm that age and longevity were not considerations for her. "I didn't know I was that old. And then I'm looking at the media and seeing '60-year-old woman.' I said, 'That's me?' Because I don't know what age means, you know? I feel like a 40-year-old."
"It's being defined as something incredible. I'm not doing anything incredible; my energy, my pregnancy, my delivery — there were no complications.
Birnbaum, a psychologist from Saddle River, underwent in-vitro fertilization last year in Cape Town, South Africa, at a center that specializes in older women. She and her husband, Ken, a New York attorney, have been married for 38 years.
"I suppose age has been redefined, hopefully," she told Storm, admitting that her television appearance was in part to let other women know that "if they feel like it and they feel young enough, go do whatever it is you want to do. It's about empowerment for women."
Birnbaum was not concerned by the fact that she would be 80 when her twin boys attend college. "My parents both lived on into their 90s," she said. "My father was 92; my mother was 89. They were mentally sound. And they'd both be alive [today] if not for medical negligence. So we've had no problems with that decision, as far as longevity is concerned."
She said she and her husband wanted their 6 ½-year-old boy to have siblings of a comparable age. (They have two older children — a son, 33, and a daughter, 29).
Coincidentally, Tuesday was the birthday of twins born one year ago to a 59-year-old woman — also to a New Jersey woman. Lauren Cohen gave birth to Gregory and Giselle on May 22, 2006, at New York Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia.
Cohen said Birnbaum contacted her after seeing her name in a magazine and that the two quickly became friends.
"We talked about babies; I suggested things that would be helpful when you try to feed two babies simultaneously," Cohen said.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.



- 1
- 2
- next
See all 74 CommentsNotice it said Tuesday? That's two days ago!!! Fox News already did this article--two days ago!!!
CBS, get off your @sses and get to work!!!!
Posted by Puzzler125 at 11:41 AM : May 24, 2007
That's because the health risks of mother/child are primary factors, vs the men who aren't going through the pregnancy itself. Age directly impacts that, vs providing sperm alone.
As for the mother's comment, "it's about empowerment for women..." What a crock. An "empowered woman" does what is best for her offspring's life, period. Being a woman is NOT just about being able to bear children. That, IMHO, creates a very stereotyped image.
Now it is medical negligigence if her 92 years old father passes away !!!
No wonder, no American doctor was willing to implant embryo in her old uterus and she had to fly out of country to Africa to get her sick desire filled.
Posted by bebebe333 at 12:12 PM : May 24, 2007
A biological right doesn't denote the possession of wisdom or common sense. Any mammal can breed. But it takes more than that to be a responsible parent. I think this woman is going through a VERY long mid-life crisis, based on the idea that she's viable only if she can bear children.
I have a good friend who has a father thats 88 and she is 27. SO WHAT! He's an incredible parent and is always there for her. It' seems amazing to me that you can be a drug addict and start having kids at 19 and keep on having them. Most of them end up in CPS or in foster programs. Or just simply having children when you are not emotionally ready yet but thats o.k. because you might be at the "right age"?
On another note, my lttle sister has a friend whose mother just died an accidental death at the age of 38. My point is that it doesn't matter how old you are. In the end what matters is that you were the best parent possible while you were alive.
Posted by incog-nito at 11:36 AM : May 24, 2007
ROFLMAO!
And now, back to our regularly scheduled program.
Posted by mormonman1 at 01:15 PM : May 24, 2007
If my memory serves me correctly, the oldest woman to conceive naturally (no medical intervention) and successfully give birth was 59.
"God" intends for us to do what brings love and light into this world. These parents obviously want and love these babies. Leave your 17th century mentality on a barren cliff in Utah somewhere, ok.
Posted by MizQue
Over population is not the number one problem on this planet. Think again.
I just have one question for Mrs. Birnbaum. Since, according to you, we are living longer and redefining age, are you willing to give up any social security benefits? I mean, if 60 is the new 40, are you willing to hold off on benefits for another 20 years? Doubt it.
Wanting siblings for her 6 year old child is not a selfish act...Even if the parents don't live to see them graduate from high school, at least they will not be alone since they already have three siblings! And the six year old will not be alone either! If people want to have children at that age, for their own personal reasons, it's obvious they are going to take care of them, or they wouldn't go through such trouble unlike so many unwanted pregancies...Obviously God wanted her to have more children or he would not have enabled to IVF to work!...Posted by AngelaChevy
Sad how ignorant people can be and want to judge others especially if they have NOT been through this themselves! I'm happy that that couple were able to have more children. Good for them! Until YOU have lived through it YOURSELF, don't judge them because you really have no clue what you are talking about.
Sad how ignorant people can be and want to judge others especially if they have NOT been through this themselves! I'm happy that that couple were able to have more children. Good for them! Until YOU have lived through it YOURSELF, don't judge them because you really have no clue what you are talking about.
People have the freedom of choice given to them by GOD. These people chose to exercise that right. Going by your statement nothing would happen without GOD allowing it, which is not true. GOD does not allow the drug dealers to deal to young kids. GOD does not allow an irate husband to beat his kids. GOD does not allow people to kill people. GOD does not allow IVF to work. That is medical science and these people chose to use medical science to get pregnant.
If those children were not meant to be, then God would have not allowed the IVF to work. Invitro Fertilization procedures have a small percentage of success anyway, so for it to work this easily and produce twins.... it's completely OBVIOUS they were meant to be or they would not exist.
Sad how ignorant people can be and want to judge others especially if they have NOT been through this themselves! I'm happy that that couple were able to have more children. Good for them! Until YOU have lived through it YOURSELF, don't judge them because you really have no clue what you are talking about. Posted by AngelaChevy
To compare a couple who wants to have a child via medical science with a person who deals drugs proves you really have no clue what you are talking about. I'm sure the million plus people who have gone through successful IVFs would disagree with your ignorant opinion. So what if she's 60?!?! It doesn't matter how young or old you are to bear a child. It's their right and they did nothing wrong! Even if the couple were in their early 20s there's no guarantee that they will live until they are old. We could all go anyday. Leave the judgements to God and stop preaching things you don't understand! Oh yea, and mind your own business and get a life as bebebe333 stated earlier!
If she wants to deal with the VERY HIGH risk of miscarriage, let her do it. I am 27 and misscarried last year. I would NOT put myself in that position at THAT age.
I just have one question for Mrs. Birnbaum. Since, according to you, we are living longer and redefining age, are you willing to give up any social security benefits? I mean, if 60 is the new 40, are you willing to hold off on benefits for another 20 years? Doubt it.
Posted by rohink at 01:57 PM : May 24, 2007
umm think again rohink
So in your fantasy little world the United States is the whole world???? We are a small portion of the world geneous.
I really could care less but if you need to go to a hospital for someone to use a turkey baster to get you pregnant you should'nt be having kids. be it you are 80 years old or 15 years old... Listen to your body, sometimes it helps you stop doing something that is &^%&^%^in *&^$^%$(^&....
You misunderstood what I said which is quite simple really. This is what I said in response to something you said "People have the freedom of choice given to them by GOD. These people chose to exercise that right. Going by your statement nothing would happen without GOD allowing it, which is not true. GOD does not allow the drug dealers to deal to young kids. GOD does not allow an irate husband to beat his kids. GOD does not allow people to kill people. GOD does not allow IVF to work. That is medical science and these people chose to use medical science to get pregnant." I most certainly was NOT comparing this woman to someone who deals drugs. You said GOD chose to let the IVF work and I disagree saying GOD gave her free choice just as he gave it to you and me AND the drug dealers. I said that GOD does not allow drug dealers to deal to little kids, meaning that they have the free choice to deal to the kids. Don't twist words.
I COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE. If you cannot have kids the 'natural' way then you shouldn't be having kids because GOD is trying to tell you something (ANGELACHEVY, you get it now?)
AngelaChevy you say "It doesn't matter how young or old you are to bear a child." Does that mean you think it is okay for a 12 year old to get pregnant? Because that is just plain wrong at that age.
People have the freedom of choice given to them by GOD. These people chose to exercise that right. Going by your statement nothing would happen without GOD allowing it, which is not true. GOD does not allow the drug dealers to deal to young kids. GOD does not allow an irate husband to beat his kids. GOD does not allow people to kill people. GOD does not allow IVF to work. That is medical science and these people chose to use medical science to get pregnant.
Posted by Phoenix1218 at 02:48 PM : May 24, 2007
It depends on which magical "god" you believe to exist. But the fact of the matter is that no matter what you believe over half of the world believes otherwise. Oh but i forgot only your magical god you have been brainwashed to believe is the right one. sorry my bust how dumb could i have been. You do realize in the future we will look back and laugh at people like you and your god like we look at the greeks and their greek gods. Please people lets move out of the dark ages already this is getting annoying...
You are ONLY 37, there is NOTHING wrong with having a baby at that age. I didn't realize you were THAT young. And I am glad you had a successful pregnancy. Personally, I do not agree with IVF at ANY age because there are so many children in this country that need a home, but I wouldn't tell you that, unless of course you asked...other than that I would be supportive.I I don't see anything wrong with having a child up to the age of 45. It just is not fair to the child for the parent to be so old and not be able to play with them like 'normal' aged parents can. that is not to say that all younger parents are perfect. I know grandparents who are raising their grandkids and are doing ok., but they are just doing ok. The kid still misses out on activities they should normally get.
wealth is not the issue - i don't give a d@mn about how much money this couple has - 'these children will not need for anything' - except LOVE of both parents who might not be around to see them graduate from high school. the old cliche money doesn't buy happiness still holds ture.
So in your fantasy little world the United States is the whole world???? We are a small portion of the world geneous.
I really could care less but if you need to go to a hospital for someone to use a turkey baster to get you pregnant you should'nt be having kids. be it you are 80 years old or 15 years old... Listen to your body, sometimes it helps you stop doing something that is &^%&^%^in *&^$^%$(^&....
Posted by itwasntme000
itwasntme000, what are you rambling about? By the way, you spelled genius wrong.
GOOD POINT
Posted by MizQue
Over population is not the number one problem on this planet. Think again.
I just have one question for Mrs. Birnbaum. Since, according to you, we are living longer and redefining age, are you willing to give up any social security benefits? I mean, if 60 is the new 40, are you willing to hold off on benefits for another 20 years? Doubt it.
Posted by rohink at 01:57 PM : May 24, 2007
According to you rohink the number one problem in the WORLD is social security!!!!!!! lmao haha to funny !!!!! I could have been blunt with it from the start like this!!!! maybe it is clear to you what i was saying.
dnot eevn get srtaed wtih seplilng msiktes man. teh olny lteers (ok i am sick of doing that) that matter in spelling a word are the first and the last letter. That is all that is needed for you to understand *** i am saying. Want me to pick apart your sentences to??? (i don't want to because I have other ways to attack a person and I don't have to resort to spelling)
I am very sorry for your loss last year. No one should have to go through that and I'm sorry if I upset you in anyway (or anyone else) by my opinions. I just feel that EVERY SINGLE child born is a BLESSING and people should not think others are bad just because they want to have a child at an older age. Yes, it 'could' be unfair to the child if the parents die before they are adults. But, there is no guarantee that they will or will not. My mother is 70 and very healthy and active. She watches my two year old son all day while I'm working and still has the energy for him. I don't see her slowing down anytime soon. The average 60 year old may not be able to keep up with a toddler but everyone is different. Since this woman says she feels 40, she probably does but that doesn't mean she should consider giving up social security as that other person stated. Just because you and I may not want a child at 50 or 60 doesn't mean another person should not have one. It's their business...we don't have to raise those children, they do, so just be happy for them and be glad it's not you :).
True enough, You nor I have to raise them. This womans older daughter is not happy about the twins, nor is she any blood relation to the twins, so who is to say that these twins will have a family to go to IF the parents die before they reach adulthood. There stands a very good chance that they will go into foster care and become a burden onto the people of New Jersey.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 74 Comments