Printable View
So, the article made a point to mention that their new baby IS their genetic child. She is 43. She said it took forever to get pregnant with their first DD...her own eggs at 43. Wow.
I didn't know that she lost 2 pregnancies while married to Tom Cruise. I always assumed she didn't want to mess up her perfect figure!
So it was their own sperm and egg via a surrogate? I am behind on my People...I just read the Kelly Preston article, still wondering on that one as she is 48...and I will eternally wonder about Elizabeth Edwards late in life kids...BUT back to Nicole, I have not read that much on her yet, besides that she used a surrogate, but I had no idea she used her own eggs?
I doubt Kelly Preston could have used her own eggs. I wonder about Elizabeth Edwards too and wonder if they did gender selection for their 2nd son.Quote:
Originally Posted by CocoChanel
I think if I could solve the Elizabeth Edwards mystery, I can die a satisfied woman. I wonder if it says in her book somewhere? Don't mean to take the focus off Nicole, but dang it, we have to figure out Elizabeth first.
The Nicole article said she is their genetic child.
Yes, but does that mean it is Keith's sperm? That would qualify as a genetic child. It doesn't mean it is both of theirs. Right? I did not read the article, btw!
Oh, yes, that is what I assumed that it was an IVF baby but her egg and his sperm. She just has a hard time carrying I guess.
I read somewhere that she had difficulty maintaining a pg, which is why her and Tom ended up adopting. It was always my theory that she wanted a bio chilld but that Tom's religion prevented her from doing so, hence the divorce.
From what I understand, this baby is biologically both of them, they just used a surrogate. Since John and Kelly are scientologists, I think their newest is probably theirs as well? no idea about Elizabeth Edwards....guess I never thought about her.