Janet Jackson is reportedly expecting her first child at the age of 49


When people talk about the importance of Michael Jackson, I get it. I get that he was a groundbreaking, amazing artist who changed the game. But if we’re talking about artists who played a major role in my life, it was all about Janet Jackson. Rhythm Nation was a seminal moment in my pre-teen years. I wanted to BE Janet Jackson. I wanted to be militant (before I even understood what militancy was). I wanted to be able to dance like that. I wanted to be that cool and beautiful. Anyway, I enjoy being able to talk about Janet Jackson, even though it’s a rare occasion. A month ago, Janet canceled her world tour, giving a cryptic excuse about “planning her family.” Many believed that she was either pregnant or perhaps exploring surrogacy. Well, Entertainment Tonight claims that Janet really is pregnant. At the age of 49.

Just days before Mother’s Day, a source confirms to ET that Janet Jackson is pregnant with her first child. The baby news comes after the 49-year-old singer — who will turn 50 on May 16 — announced last month that she will be postponing her tour to start a family with husband Wissam Al Mana. “We’re in the second leg of the tour and there actually has been a sudden change,” Jackson explained in a video posted to Twitter on April 6. “I thought it was important that you be the first to know. My husband and I are planning our family, so I’m going to have to delay the tour.”

Jackson secretly wed Al Mana, 41, in 2012, but didn’t confirm the news until early 2013. This is the singer’s third marriage.

[From ET]

Having a baby at 49 years old is… interesting. It reminds me a bit of Halle Berry’s so-called “geriatric pregnancy” at the age of 46. Do you think Wissam and Janet conceived naturally, or was she helped along with fertility treatments and/or IVF? In any case, congrats to Janet and Wissam.

Janet also dropped her new music video for “Damn Baby.” I like this, but mostly because it reminds me of her ‘80s and ‘90s hits.


Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

131 Responses to “Janet Jackson is reportedly expecting her first child at the age of 49”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Pinky says:

    This is wonderful news! She likely froze eggs, embryos, or used a donor egg, but whatever the case, it’s been a long time coming and I’m happy for her.


  2. Margo S. says:

    I think she most probably started freezing her eggs years ago and is using a younger egg with his sperms via IVF. I know of a lot of mom’s that have taken this route. Pregnant in their mid 40′s but the eggs used are back from when they were in their 30′s. Congrats to them!

  3. anniefannie says:

    I wonder if this was a opps/ yay i can’t believe it but I’m preggers baby? I mean who does invitrio or whatever during a world tour? Surely they’d be a clause in the insurance rider?
    Either way gf doesn’t age…..Congrats to them!

    • ab says:

      yeah, I doubt she would have planned to be going through IVF while she was on tour! surprise babies can definitely happen at 49. hopefully all goes well.

    • tracking says:

      The “family planning” language is a little weird and to me suggests surrogacy, but who knows.

      • hardcore fluff says:

        Agree – people aren’t addressing the obvious here because she’s well liked. But surrogacy fits the sequence of events and announcements better than either an in vitro effort during a major tour or a whoops-yay event that needed to be planned.

      • Sarah says:

        I go with the surrogacy idea too. Sorry but her age makes a pregnancy too high risk and conception a long shot IMO. So I figure she is using a surrogate but she and her husband would prefer people to believe she had the baby herself. She wouldn’t be the first celebrity to do this (cough-Beyonce-cough).

    • Bridget says:

      Janet may not have expected to need to rest up as much. A ton of performers continue to tour while pregnant. Not to mention… apparently her tour wasn’t selling well in the first place.

    • tealily says:

      Or maybe she conceived more quickly than anticipated.

  4. vauvert says:

    Congrats to them, I would imagine that this is a much desired baby to go through with pregnancy at 50.

    I think that how she conceived is her business – if she shares the details, fine but otherwise I would not speculate, it seems intrusive. My only comment would be that having a child at this age is a challenge – of course, in her age the money will relieve the hardships, but still, having a teenager in your sixties is brave! OTOH men have been doing this for ages, with babies on their second/third marriages so yay equality:-)

  5. notasugarhere says:

    With unlimited funds, even things with 1 percent possibility can happen. Remember Laura Linney at 49?

    • V4Real says:

      Well Geena Davis had twins at 48.

      Congrats to JJ, I hope it’s a healthy baby.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Holly Hunter had twins at 49. Question is whether it was their egg or someone else’s. With unlimited funds for IVF and testing, it could be their egg.

      • Ripley says:

        @NASH, between her money and the Qatari Al Mana family money they definitely have the “unlimited funds” part down.

        However if it is that they are pregnant, happy for her. And oh my God is she a vampire in that video.

        *Edit for grammatical errors*

      • notasugarhere says:

        I am happy for them as well. At the time they married (or when it went public), she said this was something they wanted. If it has taken this long, you know they’ve been trying everything they could.

    • Annetommy says:

      My aunt had my cousin almost sixty years ago at the age of 51. No IV then. He was and is fine and in case there are any conspiracy theorists out there, he is the spitting image of her. I’m not a Janet fan, but congrats.

  6. Jb says:

    I got preg on my own at 42 and my doc was pretty amazed – given I lived in California my age wasn’t a surprise as much as the lack of ivf, medications etc. I think it’s great – however it came together for her. I do hope she goes the route of at least being honest that it doesn’t just happen at her age.

    • SamiHami says:

      Sure it happens at her age. It’s rare, but certainly not unheard of. In all likelihood she did use some medical intervention to help her get pregnant, but not necessarily.

    • sherry says:

      I had my third and final baby at 41. I conceived the first month we started trying with no problem. However, my body let me know during that pregnancy that it was done having children. I was so tired throughout that pregnancy.

      I cannot imagine being pregnant at 50, but I am very happy for her!

  7. reg says:

    She is not pregnant and did not freeze her eggs. If Obgyn examined
    her he would have confirmed she had given birth already,
    which was 30 years ego to her secret daughter. Jackson
    clan raised Janets daughter, she is now pregnant
    and the father signed away his parental rights.
    Now Janet Jackson will try to pass her grandchild
    for her own child. There is no surrogate involved.

    • OrigialTessa says:

      Um, what? Yes, I think she’s going to steal her daughter’s baby too. Yep, that makes the most sense. Uh huh.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Ooh, nice hat! Is that real tin foil?

      • ab says:

        lol you beat me to the tinfoil hat comment!

      • Bridget says:

        Well… if this were going to be true about anyone, it would be a Jackson. Think about Michael’s own kids, and how he even went so far as to have a sham marriage with his surrogate.

      • Magnoliarose says:

        Right? How weird.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Especially since, in this day and age, she could, you know just tell people I had a daughter when I was very young and nobody would think twice, so…

      • Bridget says:

        Again, just pointing out: this is a woman who hid her 10 year marriage. If it were anyone else I wouldn’t wonder, but the Jackson’s are notoriously weird and secretive.

    • lisa says:

      i think this is a lot more plausible

      my 2nd choice is a pillow baby

    • Tulip says:

      Oh, wow. Any reason why the daughter wants to give up her baby to Janet?

    • SamiHami says:

      LOL! I love posts like this one! Since you seem to know all about her private life, I’m assuming you are a family member? Or an employee? Please, do tell us how you came to know all of this. :)

    • prissa says:

      @REG – Yes, exactly!

      Kudos to you for being brave enough to express your opinion!!

    • Myrna says:

      Gotta say that I think much of @reg’s take sounds plausible.
      It’s been floating out there for decades that JJ had a baby and that her father convinced her not to reveal it at the height of her career.
      Instead, the family raised the child – some say her sister Reggie did as her own.

      It’s also been the subject of a few blinds that JJ’s recent tour was a flop.
      Tickets weren’t selling at all.
      A fake illness was put out there – they even went as far as implying she had cancer – as a way to raise sympathy/attention with hopes to increase ticket sales.

      That didn’t work.

      Next, she puts out that cryptic video that she’s cancelling/postponing the tour to work on a family.

      Poof – she’s pregnant at 49!

      Is it possible, yes.
      Likely, no.

      But the twist @reg puts forth that JJs secret child is pregnant and JJ is going to raise her grandchild as her own is a bit over the top
      But who knows with this family…

      I believe she’s got a surrogate and will pretend to be pregnant herself.
      Photos of JJ are rare (she goes underground like no other) so the fake pregnancy will be a cinch to pull off.

      • V4Real says:

        It’s actually Rebbie Jackson and I heard those rumors as well years ago. The father was supposed to be James Debarge, her husband for a year.

        But until it’s proven they are just rumors. It makes for some good gossip though.

      • Magnoliarose says:

        The rumor is she and James hid the baby. I have no idea what is true. They were married for a year or so but its murky.

      • WTW says:

        It’s quite possible for a 49 year old to carry a baby with no surrogate. That’s why you hear stories about grandmothers carrying their daughters’ children. It’s not the uterus that’s the problem; it’s the eggs. Eggs age and have more chromosomal abnormalities, making it harder for older women to conceive. But if she froze her eggs when she was younger or is using donor eggs, it is quite possible that she is pregnant now. Celebs shouldn’t have to disclose this info but it would clear up many of the misperceptions the public has about infertility and how aging affects reproduction.

      • Myrna says:

        @V4Real – yes, it’s Rebbie, not Reggie…my typo.
        @WTW – absolutely it’s an issue of healthy young eggs, so maybe she had them frozen.

        What I find eerie and troubling is how this went down.
        Not my business, true, but it’s creepy how it SEEMS she planted lies about being ill when she couldn’t fill seats and when that didn’t work in filling them, she resorts to that video message announcing the postponement of her tour to work on her family.
        And how her doctor wants her to rest.

        Pretty sad what celebs do to protect their image, isn’t it?

        When it’s their lifeline/living, they’ll resort to any extreme, even lying about a baby.
        Speaking as a mere mortal, I can’t imagine attaching such lies to my children.
        It turns my stomach.

    • kcarp says:

      I had heard she baby long ago as well. I dont know if it is true or what. I doubt she is pregnant too she is probably going to have a surrogate and she can afford it I don’t blame her. That would be really weird if she was passing off her grandchild as her kid. I have to admit though the Jackson’s are some of the weirdest bunch people ever. But whatever to each their own

    • Colette says:

      If she has a daughter post the picture of the daughter.Oh and don’t post those pics of Randy’s daughter Stevanna that are all over the net.Yes Stevanna looks just like her aunt Janet.She is also only 25 and graduated from Harvard so don’t post the pic of her with her grandfather Joseph at her college graduation.I will check back later for real pics of her daughter.

    • Mimz says:


    • Heat says:

      Bless your heart. {snicker}

    • colleen says:

      I read this same blind item a while back too. It was my first thought when I read the headline.

    • Nimbolicious says:

      Given the family’s weirdness, this seems utterly plausible to me. And I’ve heard the story before.

    • RhoSue says:

      I heard this same story, googled it, and found Janet’ s love child, who is reportedly Preggers . I believe that story over her conceiving a new baby.

  8. aims says:

    Congrats to Janet and her husband. Very happy for them. For myself,I don’t want to be doing the baby thing at almost 50. But that’s me, everyone is different.

  9. Ellie66 says:

    Congrats! She looks amazing I love her hair.

  10. QQ says:

    The twitter Memes about the tour cancellation kill me softly every week

  11. Chelly says:

    Pregnant at 50 is insane & i dont mind being the minority on this. Its just not right but w/e. Heres to a healthy pregnancy & baby

    • meme says:

      I agree but I don’t think she’s carrying the baby.

    • Zuzus girl says:

      Agree. At least she can afford to hire people to have the energy to raise the child.

    • lisa says:


    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I think if her doctor says she is healthy and the eggs were frozen from an earlier period, it’s not insane. If I could have had a baby at 50 that way, I would have done it. I don’t think I would conceive a baby at 50 with whatever eggs were left because of the dangers to the baby, but I think it’s between her and her doctor. You’re entitled to a different opinion, of course.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Does every man who has a child over 50 also get condemned by you, or only the women? With pre-implantation genetic testing, they can choose the healthiest embryo.

      • pinetree13 says:

        Well to be fair…a lot of us do think this way. For example, my husband flat out told me many years ago that he was “Not comfortable” with having children passed the age of 40 because he feels he would be too old at that point to parent them when they were older the way he wants to.
        Personally (and different choices for different people are fine to me!) I feel like for me the cutt-off would be by age 45 for either gender. But that’s obviously an arbitrary number that I’m comfortable with…not something I would expect/impose on someone else.

    • Tifygodess24 says:

      @chelly, so do you feel the same way about men who have babies in their 50s…60s…. Hell even 70s and older? I mean I would hope so. Because I find in our society when an older woman has a baby later on in life (heck even in her late 30 or 40s!) people are horrified and their response is usually “that’s just not right- she’s too old!!” but they don’t bat an eye at a man who keeps impregnating women later in age.

      • Chelly says:

        As i said, i dont mind being the minority. This is solely MY opinion & thoughts. It is a combination of health for both mother & baby (sure a doctor can state otherwise but only when youre pregnant do you know the outcome) & the age, yes. FOR ME it is selfish to have a baby at 50+ years old…for both men & women. I absolutely share this feeling when older me in the same age range procreate. It is selfish, with women could be a huge health risk, & just (IMO) not right. I wont continue to defend my thoughts as Im entitled to them like everyone else, but i am clarifying to include both sexes. However, IF she is in fact pregnant, god speed. I honestly hope for a healthy pregnancy & baby…it really is her perogative & i 100% get that. I just wanted to include another persepctive that just because something CAN be done doesnt necessarily mean it should be

      • imqrious2 says:

        I think that’s because most of those older men are with/married to much younger women who will bear the brunt of the child raising/rearing, and be around (most likely) as the child grows into adulthood.

        With an older mom AND dad, chances aren’t as good for both parents to be around into the child’s adulthood.

        Just my opinion. And for what it’s worth, I think that men who have kids late in life, knowing now what birth defects they contribute with aging sperm, should be held in the same light as older women (see all the comments above about being an older mom).

    • JenniferJustice says:

      I agree and it has nothing to do with the health or lack of health regarding the eggs involved. Having a child at age 50 and over IMO is selfish. Being in your 60′s with a teenager is the equivalent of having a grandparent. Age does matter as far as energy and hello! life span. Her child will be lucky to have a parent when he/she is merely in his/her mid-20s. It’s not fair and it’s not cool – IMO. I feel this way about men and women having children so late in life.

      Also, beyond the health of the mother’s eggs being in question at that age, which I get she probably either had her eggs frozen when she was younger or is using a surrogate, there is also the question of the health of older father’s sperm, as studies are revealing a correlation between older men’s sperm and children being born with certain forms of Autism. Just because a person wants something badly and has the options or opportunity to make it happen, doesn’t necessarily make it right.

      • Kitten says:

        To me, having a child at The Magical Age That Everybody Approves Of even if you’re not emotionally or financially able to be the best parent you can be is the definition of selfish.

        Out of all the selfish reasons for which I’ve seen appropriately-aged people have kids: because their parents want grandkids, because they’re bored in their marriage, because they think it’s what they *should* do, because their marriage is failing, because it’s what everybody else does, because they don’t want to die alone, because who will take care of them when they’re older? because WHATEVER. There are 8 million selfish reasons why people have kids but all of those people are of the *appropriate age* so it’s all good? Are you REALLY telling me that these people’s kids will automatically grow up better than a loving fifty-year-old couple who have wanted kids their entire marriage and finally found a way to have one?

        Who gives a sh*t? Why is age even a focus? The focus should be how much does the parent want to have a child for the RIGHT reasons. The right reasons being because their child is an expression of intense love between two people and/or because they want to be everything they can possibly be to their child, to give them everything they did and did not have, to provide guidance, love and security, to show their child that the world is a magical place.

        Why is this NOT the focus?

        Why is age even relevant at all, as long as the person is financially and emotionally ready to commit to raising a child the right way?

        I will never understand it, but I have a feeling that it stems from people’s inherent need to feel better than others.

      • Rohan says:

        Well said, Kitten.

  12. Melody says:

    Happy for her, but – yeah, right. Just say you’re using a carrier (because they are) and go on tour.

  13. MSat says:

    Having a baby at 49 sounds like a form of punishment to me, but congrats to her!

  14. Snowflake says:

    Congratulations, Janet! :-)

  15. missmerry says:

    she seems like a sweet lady, but I can’t stand women who have a baby voice at any age, much less 50.

    maybe thats just her voice, but it would annoy me in real life.

    i had a coworker who retired last year and she used a baby voice all of the time, i wanted to die.

  16. Sam says:

    I think sources confirmed that they worked with a fertility specialist. My money would be on her freezing eggs and now choosing to have a child. And this isn’t new. Sophie B. Hawkins just recently gave birth at 50 with an embryo she had frozen years before. So it does happen. And clearly this is a much wanted child who will have loving parents. Nothing to critique about that. I do worry that the Jackson family is a little…unstable, shall we say. I hope she’s able to keep her kid away from all that.

  17. Scarlett says:

    My girlfriend is 50 and she just had a baby. Paid $5k – froze someone else’s eggs, went through hormones and treatments, and had them implanted in her. They have several frozen embryos left over and plan to go for Round 2 soon, which is what really blows my mind about the whole thing! But to each his/her own;) I had a natural baby at 41 – after a miscarriage and setting my entire intentions toward it. I know how strong the drive to carry a child can be. Congrats to Miss Jackson.

  18. Thais says:

    There is no way this happened without a doctor’s help. She could used her own frozen eggs or a donor egg. But the chance this was a natural pregnancy is practically zero.

    I’m happy for her. I do worry sometimes that women will hear news like this (or the Halle Berry “miracle” pregnancy) and think they have more time to start a family than they really do. I used to feel that way when I was in my late 30s. Then I read a story that emphasized just because you look young (which I do), your insides aren’t young. I freaked, got blood tests and turns out my egg reserve wasn’t in great shape. It took me a year to get pregnant at 39 and only managed it using IVF.

    I wish egg freezing had been more mainstream (and slightly cheaper) when I was in my 20s and 30s. When this subject comes up, I always urge single friends in their 30s to freeze their eggs as insurance, just in case.

    • tracking says:

      I get all of this, but I also know a number of ladies who’ve had surprise pregnancies in their mid-40s (46-47). Happens all the time, but usually for women who’ve previously had kids. It’s much more rare for a first-time pregnancy, and at 49, but it does happen. I do have a friend whose first pregnancies were at 48 and 49 (natural), but unfortunately did not succeed. The second went to 16 weeks, which was sad. Regardless of the method of conception, I hope Ms. Jackson has a good outcome, and can raise that baby in a happy and healthy environment.

      • Dena says:

        my Mom got pregnant accidentally at 45 years old – not on birth control because she didn’t think she could get pregnant at that age. And there are several women in my family who’ve conceived naturally in their forties. It’s rare, but it happens. And my OB has already warned me that, with my family history and all, even though I’m pushing forty I should be careful!

      • Starkiller says:

        Yes, the key seems to be having had children previously. My best friend’s mother had him at 48-she’d apparently been told several years prior that she was in menopause and couldn’t get pregnant. However, she’d already had several other children in her late 20s and early 30s. But outliers happen-one of my aunts had her first child at 42, never having been pregnant before.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        I know two women who became pregnant naturally in their mid-40s. One was my mother who became pregnant with my little brother when she was 43. It was not an accident. She planned it, but there were alot of tests for Down Syndrome and other potential problems. My brother is completely healthy and devoid of any conditions, etc.

        My friend accidentally became pregnant when she was 45. She had no testing until the gender reveal at four months and found out it was a boy and he has Down Syndrome. They are a wonderful family and he is soooo loved, but they fear for his future when they’re gone.

        You just never know.

    • The Original G says:

      My brother was born 45 years ago, when my mother was a month shy of 49. It happens. :)

    • Magnoliarose says:

      My aunt had her one and only at 41 and my great grandmother had her last of 14 at 48.
      But it’s not the norm. Whatever she’s done good for her.

    • pinetree13 says:

      Great comment Thais! And of course the chorus of “BUT MY BEST FRIEND”S AUNT”S COUSIN HAD HER BABY NATURALLY AT 55!”

      No one said it was impossible. No one. But people seem to lack an understanding of statistics. It is super, incredibly unlikely.

      However, it really isn’t feasible for most women to freeze their eggs in their youth either…because it’s not like it’s a one time fee. You have to pay EVERY MONTH for the storage of those eggs. How many young women are going to be able to do that on top of a monthly car payment, rent, student loans, etc.? Sadly, I think it’s just not cheap enough to be a viable option for most women at this point.

  19. Pansy says:

    I remember practicing the 5-4-3-2-1 thing she did with her hand in the mirror when the Rhythm Nation video came out! I loooooooved Janet and am so happy for her. All the Jacksons are covered in such turmoil–here’s hoping she finds happiness in own her family!

  20. Anon says:

    I know I’ll be ripped for this, but I think it’s kind of unfair to the baby to have such an old mom. When the kid turns 30, she will be 80 years old! I’m turning 30 this year and my mom is 52. I know it’s possible for parents to die at a young age, but the likelihood of the parent dying when the child is still relatively young is so much higher. Plus, the grandparents are already so old the child will barely get a chance to know them. I feel like it kind of short changes the child.

    • WTW says:

      @Anon, why don’t people make these sorts of comments when men father children in their 50s and up, which happens all the time. It’s never said to be unfair then, only when a woman doesn’t it. And 30 years old is an adult. If Janet dies then, she will have raised her child already. Moreover, plenty of children don’t know their grandparents well or at all. My paternal grandparents died before I was born and my father had me when he was 25. My maternal grandparents died when they were in 70s–one when I was a teen and the other when I was 25. I survived. I really detest these judgy fertility comments exclusively aimed at older moms.

      • Anon says:

        A friend of mine has an elderly father and has expressed these feelings to me before. That’s actually how I first started thinking about the topic. Also, I know you can survive without parents or grandparents. I just see it as selfish on the older parent’s part, male or female.

      • amilu says:

        As far as I can remember, people ALWAYS mention this in threads about old dads, too. And it’s usually one of the first comments. Ronnie Wood, Tony Randall, Robert DeNiro, Steve Martin…ok — that’s all I can remember. But it’s not fair to say that people don’t call old dads out on it, too.


        Unfortunately the comments are gone on the Tony Randall thread. http://www.celebitchy.com/8500/tony_randalls_widow_talks_about_their_50_year_age_difference_active_sex_life/

        Robert DeNiro – http://www.celebitchy.com/199087/robert_deniro_68_and_wife_grace_56_welcome_daughter_helen_grace_via_surrogate/

        Steve Martin – http://www.celebitchy.com/280018/steve_martin_67_has_become_a_secret_father_for_the_first_secret_time/

      • JenniferJustice says:

        We do make these same comments toward older men having children. You’ll find this opinion on the threads for the articles for Michael Douglas, Steve Martin, George Lucas, Robert DeNiro, Hugh ? (British actor), Alec Baldwin, etc. so it is not a gender issue. It is an older parent issure all around. Every time there is an article on this site about an older woman doing anything “controversial” whether it be having a baby, marrying a much younger man, acting or dressing promiscuous, etc. there is always the idea that only older women are targets of negative opinions and that simply isn’t the case. Most who don’t like something for an older woman don’t like it for older men as well. They aren’t gender issues. If anything, they are ageism issues but at least we’re fair in doling out our opinion equally to both genders. LOL.

        Losing your grandparents while still having a parent is not the same as having no parents or grandparents. A person in their 20′s or even 30′s still needs their parents very much. We may physically be adults, but we still need guidance, a sense of famiy, and a support system not only for ourselves but for the family we make when we have our own children. I needed my mom and sister when I got married and started my own family. I would have survived without them, but merely surviving doesn’t seem very encouraging or make for happiness.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Would you rather not be born? i get what you’re saying, and I feel the same way about men who have a child when they’re 67 but the other option is don’t exist at all, you know?

      • Anon says:

        I never understand when people ask this question. If you weren’t born you wouldn’t have any awareness anyway.

      • Kitten says:

        If this person knows that they will get ripped for their comment then they’ve likely heard every counterargument and still have no intention of opening their mind up a it, so I wouldn’t bother GNAT.

        Myself? I don’t GAF how old someone is when they have their kid, as long as they can provide that child with a loving and stable environment, the rest is all arbitrary nonsense and unnecessary judgment.

      • Anon says:

        @kitten that is a bit rude. Just because someone doesn’t share your opinion does not mean they have a closed mind. If everyone thought the same way the world would be a boring place.

      • Virgilia Coriolanus says:

        I kind of agree–basically I have NO IDEA why anyone that old would want to be having a kid, let alone their first………but more power to them. But I’m not babysitting, so you better hire a nanny, lol.

      • Kitten says:

        @Anon-Maybe it came across as rude but to me rude is insinuating that it is somehow selfish or “unfair” for an older person to have a child. I get that you’re just sharing your opinion and MY opinion is that yours is a close-minded one. Once you put it out there, be prepared to defend it because not everybody is going to agree with you.

        @VC-lol…deal! But the BF and I both agree that we’re not parental material so your only obligation is occasional cat-sitting ;)

        RE: older parents
        The thing that people don’t seem to get is that it doesn’t always work out the way you want it to. People think that everybody has the luxury of having a kid at the “right” age (whatever the hell THAT means) when the reality is that circumstances, fertility issues, relationship factors, professional obligations, financial limitations, and a myriad of other factors play into when a person can or is ready to conceive. Mostly, I don’t understand why anybody cares what choices other people make when it comes to conception. It’s personal. I’d rather see parents wait until everything feels right to have a child than have a baby in haste because Anon and the rest of society says that __ is the right age to have a kid.

      • Anon says:

        I think calling someone close-minded is lazy and dismissive. We have different opinions. That doesn’t make one of our minds more open than the other.

      • Kitten says:

        @Anon- I think I expressed my opinion pretty clearly here and on my comments above-nothing lazy about it.
        I’m not sure why you’re so hung up on the term “closed-minded” as it’s not really an insult, more of an observation. Not being open to the possibility that an older parent could be a GREAT parent is incredibly closed-minded to me.

      • Pepper says:

        Well exactly, you wouldn’t exist, so it’s not like you’re losing anything.

        As someone who had to bury both parents before I hit my 20′s, it awful. I basically have no family because all my grandparents, aunts and uncles etc. are dead, and my cousins are twice my age and thus we barely know each other. It’s had a huge effect on my life. A big part of me hates my parents for doing that to me. They knew there was a very high possibility they’d die while I was still a teenager, and they made a choice to put me through that. And if they’d lived, I’d have been stuck being their carer while I was still young, so it’s lose-lose basically.

        Having my own children now, I can’t comprehend bringing them into this world knowing you’ll be leaving them so early. People put more thought into adopting a pet. You wouldn’t get a dog knowing you’ll only be around for 1-2 years of it’s life, but sure, have a kid knowing you’ll only be around for 10-20 years of it’s life.

    • The Original G says:

      I had old parents. My parents were separated by war for 19 years. When they were reunited they had me when my mother was 40 and my brother at 49. (My father was 9 years older than her) My parents were secure, devoted and they were most certainly energized and stayed younger than their peer group.

      In fact for millennia, many children have had a grandparent(s) be a primary caregiver with no ill effects to individual or humanity. I think a diversity of people around a child is natural and healthy. Ageism, unfortunately, seems to be quite sanctioned by our youth-driven consumer culture.

    • vanessa says:

      Why should anyone get to have an opinion on somebody else’s reproductive choices? I’m sure Janet was armed with all the information she needed and made the best choice for her and her family. If she is willing to take the risks, that is her business. There are plenty of young people out there who are shitty parents – we don’t need to look down upon these loving older parents.

      • Anon says:

        I think everyone has a right to have an opinion on everything honestly. Hopefully Janet will live to 100. I was just offering a different perspective based on a friend of mine who has experienced having an elderly parent.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        Because this is a gossip site created specifically for people to talk and give opinions. Why is it that only Janet’s happiness or any hopeful older mother’s happiness is the only person’s happiness that matters regarding the decisions they make? A potential baby already doesn’t have a voice in the matter, so people are going to speak on the baby’s behalf or in the baby’s interest. And just because someone is informed doesn’t mean they necessarily make good decisions. It is not just her business to take risks that like IMO. I don’t get what shitty young parents have to do with this conversation at all. Yes, there are plenty of people young and old who have no business parenting, but that’s not what the issue is here. I dont’ think anybody questions whether the baby will be loved or not. The question is is it okay to only get that love into your 20s and then be on your own? It makes for a lonely life devoid of elders and that sense of family.

      • Vanessa says:

        “A lonely life devoid of elders”? The Jacksons are a huge family, I’m sure this kid will still have some guidance later in life if something happens to Janet and her husband. Maybe your family isn’t close, but I certainly have elders to rely on in addition to my parents. I’m sorry if you didn’t get the point about younger parents. You are talking about damaging children. Wouldn’t you rather have an older loving parent for a shorter time that a crappy parent that was around until your 60s? I find these comments judgy and intrusive. Worry about your own uterus. I hope your reproductive life falls perfectly into place.

      • The Original G says:

        Just because someone can “talk and give opinions” on gossip sites, doesn’t make them the spokesperson for all the unborn or the judge and jury of their elders.

      • Kitten says:

        ITA Vanessa. I said something similar above, before I read your comment. It’s ultimately nobody’s damn business.

      • Vanessa says:

        Right, and where do we draw the line on who makes an appropriate parent? Should we start judging the poor, or the single, or those with less that perfect genes for having children? Are they selfish too?

      • drnotknowitall says:

        I think we are entitled to have an opinion on the safety of the situation. Openly discussing the risks of such a high risk pregnancy is both important to other women and also important because women need to be able to discuss reproductive issues in general.

        As a medical professional (OBGYN is not my specialty, but I did several rotations on the service during my residency) I can tell you that I would advise against a planned pregnancy at 49 and delivery at 50. The risk to the fetus alone are incredibly high.

        Women’s bodies are not designed to carry children during the late perimenopausal years.

        You are right that ultimately reproductive decisions are entirely up to the parents and in particular, the mother. But we have a right to discuss the safety of such decisions.

      • Vanessa says:

        Openly discussing science and statistics and calling someone selfish for having children at an advanced age are two different things. As I said in my initial comment, I’m sure they went into this knowing the risks and they made the right choice for them.

    • Arpeggi says:

      In this particular case, I think that not knowing the grandparents, at least on the maternal side, would actually be a blessing: it’s the Jackson family after all! I honestly think that anyone would do better by not having any interaction with Joe Jackson, and even his wife. It might seem hard, but I had a grandad that was not half as batsh*t crazy as this guy and cutting him out of my life as soon as I could was the best thing I could ever do for my sanity and happiness.

      For me, the issue is not so much about the parents’ age (even though having a kid at that age can lead to several issues, not only for the mother and child, but also to the potential next generation, for instance, there are links between an older father and increased risks of schizophrenia for the grandkids) than the psychological state of the parents, or at least of the mother to be. I know it’s a bit of a touchy subject, but all of the Jackson kids have severe issues, it’s perfectly normal considering the environment in which they were brought up. Janet has had her share and I truly hope that she worked on hers and healed, she seems like the most “stable” one after all. Having a child is challenging at any age, having a child at an age where most women are dealing with menopause is likely even more difficult. But having a family of your own sadly doesn’t always make up for your own crappy childhood, it’s not a do-over. I’m sure she’ll have help and she has the wealth to deal with a lot, but money doesn’t solve everything. So while I really want to congratulate the future parents, I hope that they thought this through: a child needs love, but it also needs balance and grounded parents

  21. kanyekardashian says:

    I’m so sick of selfish people bringing more babies into the world when there are children languishing around in orphanages.

  22. iheartgossip says:

    I take issue with ‘first child’. This would be third child, first she is willing to admit to.

    • Colette says:

      Post the pics of her other kids and also their birth certificates.
      Thanks in advance😃

  23. dana says:

    Happy for Janet. Janet is like our big sister. lol

    My aunt, who’s 16 years older than I, gave birth to her at 48. She was single and had a one night stand in her juke joint in Virginia… as the story goes. She delivered fine with no drugs to get her pregnant… some women’s fertility is different than others. Janet may have had help but I wouldn’t make any assumptions. Same with Halle. Women’s fertility runs the gamut. It takes some a really long time or not at all and others without even trying are very fertile.

  24. JoJo says:

    I’m really happy for her! And it doesn’t matter to me at all how she got pregnant. But for those saying it’s possible … yes, anything is “possible”, but conceiving with your own egg at that age is actually pretty close to impossible. Not saying it could never or has never happened, but it’s pretty close to being impossible. Far more likely is that she froze her eggs when she was younger like others said, or she is using a donated egg – not her own. That’s the case with so many celeb pregnancies happening later in their 40s – they’re either carrying a baby on their own using a donor egg or using a surrogate and a donor egg. These celebs just don’t make those details known – and why should they. It’s noone’s business. The only issue it creates is the rest of the world thinking it will be easy for them to have a baby at 45+ when in reality the chances at that point with your own egg are minuscule.

  25. Stephanie says:

    I think it’s natural. It seems a bit crazy to plan a tour AND a high risk pregnancy at the same time.

    • Lizzie says:

      Coincidence or conspiracy? I have tickets to her concert and it is postponed with no refunds. I got the tickets as a gift so I called
      To try to get the money returned to the buyer and ticketmaster was adamant that it wasn’t cancelled. What what are the chances she EVER goes back on tour. The whole thing is so so fishy. After 20 years off the reservation going back on tour in the middle of trying to conceive at age 50?! Give me a break. I think it was 1) a smash and grab job for money (I know i know shes rich and he husband is rich but still…) OR 2) her tour was
      Bombing and she had to get out of it somhow. Anyway it is annoying but congrats Janet!

  26. drnotknowitall says:

    I wish her a healthy delivery. 49 Is indeed considered a geriatric pregnancy because the risks are enormous to both the fetus and mother. I hope she can carry to term and do it safely.

  27. Bethie says:

    Your Janet Jackson love makes my heart sing. I loved her so much I named a cat Justice when I was in high school, after her character in Poetic Justice. My extreme Janet Jackson fangirl status is one thing that will never go away. She will never not be awesome.

  28. Bohemianmartini says:

    Science ya’ll. Congrats Miss Jackson! I hope her baby is a spitting image of her. And I’m with the other ladies – it’s her first baby- with wissam but it sure isn’t her “first born”. And that’s some stale ass basic tea 101.

  29. Shannon says:

    I had the opposite situation – never in my life did I expect to go through menopause at 38, but I did, so I have no problem believing fertility can work the other way as well. Even if it didn’t and she used some sort of treatment, congratulations to her and I wish her and her family all the best. As for age – I was 19 when I was pregnant with my first son and got all kinds of crap about being too young. I didn’t have my second son until I was 32, and people were saying things like, “You really want to have a child at THIS age?” Seriously. If there’s some magical age, I’m unaware of it. As long as your gonna be dedicated to loving and caring for the child, it’s really no one else’s concern.

    • drnotknowitall says:

      Your early onset of menopause is out of the range of normal as is an unassisted pregnancy at 49. It is incredibly unlikely (although not impossible) for a woman to get pregnant with her first child unassisted at that age. It could happen and has happened, but not with the frequency that people believe. It is unusual enough that such miracle late life babies are documented. I think it is highly unlikely she became pregnant unassisted, especially with a first child.

      If they have announced this already, then she is likely in her second trimester. She has already passed the first and most dangerous hurdle for the fetus of a late life pregnancy – miscarriage. But she still faces the most dangerous part of the late life pregnancy for both fetus and mother, – the third trimester and post- partum period. I wish her a healthy delivery and a healthy child.

      I suspect given her finances, she likely has a very solid team of high risk specialists and is probably getting weekly assessments.

  30. I Choose Me says:

    Well congrats! I never thought she wanted kids but people are entitled to change their minds. I’m not wild about the song but I love that video and I’m happy to see Taylor and Kyndall, the two youngest dancers being featured. Love those girls dancing.

  31. Leahpet says:

    Ok, so I’m going to share something with you all – last fall, I became pregnant at 49 1/2.

    No, I’m not kidding. My husband and I hadn’t used protection since I was 45 – thinking that there was no way I was going to get pregnant. And that made sense considering my age.

    I couldn’t believe it, and after 2 positive pregnancy tests, I hustled my fanny to the doctor. The doctor promptly told me that, “You absolutely cannot have this baby – it would definitely be disabled.” Considering that we already have a disabled adult son, my husband and I weren’t too scared – been there done that, right?

    My 52 yo husband was so excited – he was even picking out names (he was hoping for the elusive girl). But alas, I miscarried at around 7 weeks. So, while I can’t speak to how she got pregnant – I can personally attest that it does occasionally happen naturally to women my age.

  32. OG MJ says:

    This news of her pregnancy is almost as exciting as her intensely fine-ass man. Seriously, that dude is a babe for the ages.

  33. Dee says:

    My mom’s old high school BFF had a baby 3 years ago at 52, naturally, unplanned and unforeseen. But she had the baby. And my mom whose oldest is almost 30 wasn’t overly joyed about babysitting her kid. Ha.