Bernie Ecclestone becomes a father again at age of 89
 

Bernie Ecclestone has become a dad again at the grand age of 89.

The former Formula One boss and his wife, Fabiana Flosi, 44 welcomed a son, Ecclestone’s first.

“We have a son named Ace. I am so proud,” he told Blick magazine about the new arrival.

Ecclestone already has three daughters with his previous partners.

His eldest, Deborah, 65, was born to his first wife Ivy Bamford before welcoming Tamara, 35, and Petra, 31, with his second wife Slavica Radic.

The new dad also already has five grandchildren.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/new...ectid=12344925

That’s responsible isn’t it

oh well, some like expanding their families and even at older ages it seems :)

Selfish in the extreme

She is no spring chicken either

I look forward to the crowd that lost their minds at Brigitte having a baby in her 50’s reacting the same way to this

fair enough, Fabiana gave birth to a son in just 25 minutes either

from what i heard on our entertainment news on our local radio what they said about this news

Well the baby well be financially secure but probably never know it's dad. Far too old, I don't know what the logic there is unless you really are that uninterested in your children that you couldn't care less whether you'll even be around to see them grow up

Top shagger

Go bernie

I’d be doing blood tests ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

There's a increased risk of complications the older the parents, this was a bit irresponsible.

She's 44, that's not so bad.

Selfish

https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-an...r-older-women/

I'd say it was a risk.
At 47 admitting to myself I've moved on from fertile maiden to crone is hard... blessed be :bawling:

There's a more of a risk during the actual pregnancy of course but I was talking about after the baby is born, it's not too old imo

I don't think 44 is too old. A typical 44 year old person in today's world is a lot different to a 44 year old a few decades ago.

People are more active and healthier than before. I see no issue at all with having a child in your 40's.

90's however is a different matter, the child will be lucky to know his father and even if he does, he will most likely remember the pain of having to bury him young. The circle of life is such that children SHOULD (but sadly not always) outlive their parents but I think it's cruel to inevitably inflict that trauma on a child. The child will likely never know his father or will probably only remember him dying at a young age.

I would normally say yes to that, but given the Dads age it is a no no for me, she knows she will be on her own with the child in 10 years or less

Yes, on her own with all the help she can buy tbf :laugh:

Bernie is a nasty little ****, so if he is not around it's probably a good thing

That wont be any use to the child if something happens to her though

His wife is smart though, when he kicks it she’ll have her share and control in the kids share, quids in

Oh I know, but she's 44, it's not that likely that anything will happen to her. Hopefully she has close family as well who would step up in that case

That's the point though, she will have to ask someone to take the child on should something happen to her, its not unknown for people to die in their 40s Niamh! I wouldn't want to be put in that position no matter how close a family I have

I'm not talking about the health of the mother or her life expectancy. I'm talking about the risk to the child that increases as the mother and/or father ages. Risks like Downs syndrome and Autism.

I would imagine insurance played a part in it yes :laugh:

I know, that's why I said that I know the risk is higher during pregnancy (of losing the baby or of the baby having health issues/disabilities) but I mean assuming the baby is born healthy then I don't think 44 is too old to start raising a child