Paris Hilton & Carter Reum welcomed a baby boy via surrogacy

On November 11, 2021, Paris Hilton married Carter Reum in a lavish ceremony which was filmed for a reality show which already aired on Peacock (I have no memory of any of that). Soon after the wedding, various outlets did some digging on Reum and they found that he has a daughter whom he financially supports but has only met once or twice. The little girl is probably 10 years old right now. Paris made a big deal about how she wanted a baby and how Reum is the one. Well, shortly after the wedding, Paris and Carter made arrangements for a surrogacy. Paris is now the mother of a little boy.

Paris Hilton is starting 2023 with a new title — mom! The businesswoman and media personality, 41, and husband Carter Reum recently welcomed their first baby together, a son, via surrogate, PEOPLE can confirm.

“It’s always been my dream to be a mother and I’m so happy that Carter and I found each other,” the new mom tells PEOPLE exclusively. “We are so excited to start our family together and our hearts are exploding with love for our baby boy.”

Sharing the exciting news on Instagram Tuesday, Hilton posted a close-up photo of the baby gripping her thumb. “You are already loved beyond words 💙,” she wrote. Hilton has previously been open about her desire to become a parent alongside Reum, 41.

[From People]

I’m surprised that, with a surrogate, they implanted male embryos. That’s the most shocking part to me – I thought Paris would only want daughters. Maybe Carter wanted a boy. If Paris names this kid Conrad, I swear to God. Anyway, congrats to Paris and Carter. I kind of doubt the marriage will last but I’m happy that Paris has fulfilled her dream of becoming a mom.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

return home

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

73 Responses to “Paris Hilton & Carter Reum welcomed a baby boy via surrogacy”

  1. j.ferber says:

    Congratulations!

    • Ronaldinhio says:

      Same – sending nothing but love to Paris
      I work in trauma and as I’m sure many of you know pregnancy post trauma can sometimes simply be far too much – for others it is a road to better coping.
      I hope she is healed and heals with her son

      • Bre says:

        Thank you. Hope everyone is happy and healthy,

        As someone who struggles with post partum and birth trauma the comments on this page are part of the reason that 1 in 3 women currently suffer from mood disorders peri/post partum. Absolutely shameful some of the comments towards a woman’s choice and lifestyle

        Be f-ing kind.

      • Bre says:

        Add: the be kind is for the people below my comment that have very misguided and uninformed views around birth, trauma, bonding, adoption and surrogacy.

        Your words can be hurtful so think before you comment, even if it’s an opinion, it doesn’t excuse the nastiness. it’s trigging enough that I’m likely going to need to discuss it in my next therapy about how others shame mothers choices. Think before you comment

  2. C-Shell says:

    Well, this is sweet? Baby Boy Reum/Hilton is a very privileged kiddo — I just hope he can have as drama-free childhood as possible.

  3. ChewieNYC says:

    Good for them! Regarding the comment of implanting a male embryo- sometimes it’s not about the sex of the embryo but the one with the best quality and higher likelihood of success that matters more.

    • Lia says:

      Apparently this has become normal in America, but in Europe surrogate us still very strange. To me, honestly, that’s exploitation of a woman’s body

      • Concern Fae says:

        Yes. The attitudes about adoption are also not the norm. The rest of the world is much more about supporting families of birth. An adoptable child is a tragedy rather than an opportunity.

        I want nothing but happiness for the families these policies create, but we really need some rethinking about parenthood and children’s rights.

        Best wishes for Paris! She seems to have done a lot of work about the problems of her childhood. Here’s to a better next generation.

      • Anony says:

        Lia – please do a bit more research before forming such a cruel opinion. A few places to start:

        (1) Not all surrogates are “paid”, many surrogates are friends or family who volunteer. Due to a serious medical condition, pregnancy was not safe for me (I couldn’t even have my eggs harvested, let alone the rest of it) and after years of thinking I would not have a child, my sister-in-law *offered* to be our surrogate. (my husband’s brother’s wife who is not even related to either of us, which makes it incredibly special and a bond that will always link our daughter to her aunt in an incredibly special way.

        (2) Private surrogacy in which the family uses an “unknown” surrogate is heavily, heavily regulated in the United States due to some past issues. There are many steps along the way that involve mental health screenings of everyone involved, evaluate for coercion, and there is a contract that all parties sign (with the potential parents getting the potential gestational carrier/surrogate an attorney of their own) that lay out how the process will work, what would happen in the terrible situation where something went wrong, etc.

        (3) Most if not all IVF clinics will only work with surrogates who have already carried at least one pregnancy to term. This is both for the safety of the surrogate but also so that, again, if there were a terrible complication that impacted the surrogates fertility that it would not result in them being unable to have children.

        (4) How is being willing to make this HUGE sacrifice for another couple so they can have a child any different than many other ways that people use their bodies to make money. Do you have an iPhone, do you eat meat? Have you ever worn a diamond? There are lots of kinds of work that are incredibly exploitative to people’s body’s that we simply accept because that’s how capitalism works. Saying that this is somehow more exploitative simply because it is a person who can get pregnant choosing to do so for another person smacks of paternalism (and is a popular talking point for far-right Christians who want to ban surrogacy and IVF entirely bc there are more embryos created than used).

        Seriously, Europeans frequently trumpet how much more progressive they are about, for example, s*x work and yet the UK is overrun with “radfems” and transphobes and apparently that extends to other ways that people should or shouldn’t be allowed to decide what to do with their uteruses. In a Post-Dobbs America, maybe we think of this differently at least in part as a reaction to the minority of people in this country who DO think they should be allowed to tell women who can get pregnant how to use their body.

        Apologies if this sounds a bit like I’m overreacting to your comment and, yes, of course, there are going to be examples of surrogacy and gestational carrier relationships that have had issues, but have you researched the adoption process (particularly international adoptions)? Or, heck, talked to people who got pregnant by accident and were pressured into keeping the child? There are no perfect ways to have children but the surrogacy process may have more safeguards in place than almost any other way.

        People who can get pregnant should be entitled to make the same decisions to “exploit” their bodies as anyone else; being compensated for both the physical risks they are taking to help make a family is really the least we can do to thank them as the couples they are helping are almost always using it as a last resort (even if sometimes it seems like celebrities use them more frequently). The real injustice is that surrogacy is so expensive and not covered by health insurance meaning that there are a LOT of childless people who couldn’t take this route to parenthood even if they wanted to, much like IVF as well.

      • Anony says:

        Concern Fae – what do you mean that the rest of the world is “more supportive of families of birth” – especially in the case of surrogacy/gestational carriers, there wouldn’t BE a family of birth without the surrogate. (And usually the child is biologically related to at least one of the intended parents, if not both, because the embryos that are used do not use the eggs of the surrogate.)

        I would agree in the more general sense that the United States could do a much, much better job of supporting family reunification or family cohesion in situations where DCF (or the child protection agencies) get involved, particularly if the issues involved are poverty or homelessness. But the foster system and adoption are not co-equal. While there are people who do give up their children for adoption who might have otherwise kept them with the appropriate family support, the idea that it is the US’s attitude towards adoption that causes this is a bit absurd. It is not our attitude to adoption – it’s our attitude to public services for the poor (and, frankly, our attitude about family planning in general).

        But, the idea that all children would be better off with their birth mother/father or bio-family, regardless of whether the birth parents want said child, paints with FAR too broad a brush.

        But, again, this child (and most children born through surrogacy) are in fact biologically related to the intended parents through IVF.

        In truth, it sounds like what you’re suggesting is that people who cannot get pregnant and carry a child to term should just stay childless because [insert whatever reason here that we don’t “deserve” to be parents] but know that unlike many other children, my daughter will NEVER have to wonder if she was wanted. Because a small army of people were involved in bringing her into this world and that is its own kind of miracle.

      • equality says:

        I find it amusing that many commenters speak about Europe like it’s one big country but many protest if Africa is spoken of in that way. Anyway, point is, Europe isn’t one big country so surely things vary from country to country.

      • Eating Popcorn says:

        My SIL had breast cancer at a very young age (30) which made pregnancy out of the question. Surrogacy was the only option for her, it blessed her with a set of healthy twins – a boy & a girl. While I don’t get surrogacy for vanity’s sake (don’t want to lose a bikini body) there are plenty of conditions from melanoma to fibroids to past disordered eating that make it a wonderful, healthy option for people.

      • Emmi says:

        You’re going to be unpopular with this opinion but I agree to a point. To me, it would be absolutely out of the question to ever pay another woman to carry my child under any circumstances. But then I personally would not need a child that’s biologically mine.

        My issue is that whenever this topic comes up and you express concern, people yell “You don’t know what it’s like to desperately want a baby! Women do it voluntarily! This is a beautiful thing! Who are you to judge!” While many women do it out of the goodness of their heart, many don’t. You are, in essence, “renting” a woman’s body. And the problem is that in many European countries this is illegal so couples go abroad. To countries where the laws are sometimes murky. You know where many women went? Ukraine. Yeah. And we all know how that was suddenly a problem.

        To everyone who says money is not a factor, how many wealthy women are surrogates? And I don’t mean to their sister etc. No, how many Kardashians would BE the surrogate instead of using one? My guess is none.

        I’m not against it per se but there are some uncomfortable discussions we should probably have.

      • Liz Version 700 says:

        Kia I am guessing you never struggled to get pregnant. Love is love and families grow in many ways. Also, surrogacy much like abortion rights is an axpmome of a woman choosing how to use her body. If she gets paid so be it, not sure why that is strange.

      • Emmi says:

        @Liz Version 700: The use of a woman’s body for commercial purposes has been so normalized that you really just wrote that. I’m not blaming you as this seems to be how many many people think but THIS is exactly why we should maybe have more nuanced discussions about this.

      • VKH says:

        @Anony – Thank you for your response. I’ve been trying to comment all morning to make similar points and the comments aren’t showing up.

        Fellow mom via surrogacy over here. We endured many, many heartbreaking years of miscarriages and infertility before turning to surrogacy after some serious medical crises (including a cancer scare) left me unable to carry the embryos we had created. A childhood friend offered to be our carrier, and it was the most amazing experience for all of us. Our families have an unbreakable bond and the closest relationship.

        Even using a childhood friend, the process was highly regulated. We all went through psych exams, medical exams, had separate lawyers, signed a 50+ page contract, used escrow, had pre birth court proceedings, etc. We paid over $80k, including $35k to my friend as compensation (plus stipends for lost wages, child care, house cleaning, etc etc etc). My husband and I are middle class people who made so many sacrifices to make this happen, including living in a studio apartment with our pets for two years during the pandemic to save $. Our surrogate is far better off financially than we are.

        It’s a shame that there is such a stigma and judgment around surrogacy. Many people who choose surrogacy are people with disabilities (like myself) or from the LGBTQ+ community. Many of these comments are not only ignorant but also ableist. I wish people would learn more about the process before they judge.

      • Liz Version 700 says:

        Woah Emmi, I am not a child, I am a 50 year old lawyer with as much right to my opinion as anyone else on here. This isn’t a situation where a pimp is selling a woman against her will, this is a presumably grown woman deciding to help a couple have a child. You can agree or disagree with it, but don’t talk to me as if I am too stupid to know why I have my opinion.

      • VKH says:

        @Emmi – I also never thought I’d pay another woman to carry my child. Then life hit me sideways and a series of medical crises left me with embryos that my body physically couldn’t carry. All I’m saying is, you never know what you’ll do until you’re in the situation. I hope that you recognize the privilege that comes along with never having to make that decision. I also note that you say you’d be fine with a child that’s not biologically yours, yet you don’t acknowledge the moral and ethical questions raised by adoption. None of these paths are easy.

        I agree there need to be nuanced discussions and that outsourcing to other countries is a problem. This is exactly why surrogacy needs to be legal and highly regulated. We all know how it goes when something is banned.

        Re: money. I commented above, but in my situation, my surrogate was far better off financially than I am. Would the kardashians be surrogates? No, but they’re not exactly examples of people whose life decisions are based on altruism or service to others. I should add that the surrogacy process doesn’t allow financially insecure women to be surrogates (or anyone on any type of government assistance for that matter) bc it could be construed as financial coercion. These requirements cannot be ignored, as the parentage status of the child would be in jeopardy.

        My hope is these discussions will account for people with disabilities and others who choose surrogacy for very valid reasons.

      • Danbury says:

        All these anti surrogacy comments are pissing me off – if a woman chooses to be a surrogate, then that’s all there is to it. Her body, her choice. Enough of the virtue signalling already

        Edit: I’m in Europe and know people who have used surrogates to have their children, so no, it’s not as in the shadows as much as many think

      • Julesser says:

        Men and women’s bodies are already used for commercial purposes in any job that requires you to use your hands, legs, muscle, or spine. We’ve just been conditioned to clutch pearls about which body parts people are allowed to profit off of and which ones have to be saved for speshul purposes.

    • ABCD says:

      To separate a newborn from their mother is a huge traumatic experience, for both of them. It’s probably the biggest trauma we as humans can experience. Now I understand that sometimes there isn’t another option, but to actually plan that your child’s life starts with a trauma wound just so it’s biologically yours is incredibly selfish. (Many will say that their child born by surrogate isn’t traumatized, but that’s the thing with trauma – it’s not obvious, it’s buried deep and it will affect their and the surrogate mothers lives. And I agree that a wealthy woman would never be a surrogate to strangers.)

      • Sara says:

        In my opinion surrogacy should be more controlled as it is the case with organ donations. Only cases without a monetary interest in the exchange should be allowed. Otherwise it is simply an exploitative practice where women with fewer resources are the ones doing it and richer couples are the ones that have access to it. I agree that the Kardashians and Hiltons of the world would never be surrogates. I have empathy for couples that are struggling to have a child but having one is not a right. It should never come before women’s rights.

      • Maki says:

        I think it is about clash of civilizations. Reading American websites, magazines and books, watching movies and series, I notice that the greatest emphasis is placed on personal happiness, often regardless of the consequences for others. Some other cultures in the world have a different approach. After all, voices are getting louder asking how much surrogacy is a humane act, and how much is an example of class inequality. Yes, in the USA it is strictly controlled and those rules are probably followed, but individuals and couples often go to countries where it is all a gray area.

      • VKH says:

        Surrogacy doesn’t “separate” a newborn from its mother, it reunites a newborn with its mother. Babies born through surrogacy are some of the most loved and wanted babies on the whole planet. In many cases (and in my case), families wait YEARS and make enormous sacrifices to bring their baby into existence. My daughter’s birth story is not one of selfishness, but one of kindness, compassion, friendship, empathy, altruism, and helping others. The thing that’s far more likely to cause her emotional distress or trauma is reading comments like yours, that are full of ignorance and judgment.

      • Erin U says:

        I think surrogacy as fine as long as there is immediate skin to skin contact between the mother and child – I would think this needs to be the mom
        Using the surrogate to truly form the bond.
        I was born with the cord wrapped around my neck and went straight to intensive care with no skin to skin contact for the first day or so. I can attest to the importance of this – I have basically no bond with my mother.

      • VKH says:

        @ Erin U – skin to skin is great. I did it with my daughter. But it’s certainly not necessary to form a healthy bond. I was born 6 weeks early and immediately incubated for several months, and my mom is my best friend.

      • Erin says:

        @Erin U-As a mother, wow, that’s an incredibly ignorant sweeping statement to say that without skin to skin there can be no bond between mother and baby. For you to immediately jump to that conclusion as to why you have no bond with you mother and then project it onto everyone else is something else. Do you also think that adopted children don’t form any bonds with their adoptive parents?

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ ABCD, your comment struck a cord with me but not in the sense of surrogacy but with adoption. I became pregnant and decided to go the adoption route as I had no intention of staying with the man that was the biological father.

        Trauma for me was devastating. I crewed for a solid 6 weeks on a gf’s sofa without the ability to recover. Though that was decades ago, I still wonder how his life was. I still ache when I think about him. And when I hear people mention that women that place their children up for adoption is simply an act “gave up” their rights, it stings deeply. I did due to the fact that I had 2 healthy children and wanted to allow a couple the same gift as my children had given me.

        But to say that the mothers that carried that baby don’t face trauma as some have mentioned, that’s a flat out lie, for me it was. Even though I would not raise him, I loved him and wanted the best for him. The trauma stays with you no matter how many decades go by.

      • Seraphina says:

        @ErinU – I’m just shocked at the comment and also very saddened that a sweeping generalization would be made based solely on your experience.
        I was born very sick, taken to another hospital and stayed in NICU for two weeks. My mom only got to see me for a few minutes before I was swept away. It wasn’t until days later she was able to come a feed me once a day. Bottle fed at that. And I can tell you, I have a wonderful bond with my mom. We don’t always agree on things, but the bond is there.

      • Mcmmom says:

        Erin U – mom to 4 kids by adoption 🙋🏻‍♀️. Yes, skin to skin absolutely promoted bonding, but the notion that adopted children cannot form bonds with their parents because the skin to skin wasn’t instantaneous is 100%, totally false.

        But – based on your comment about your own mom, it sounds like you have experienced some major sadness in your life and I am really sorry about that.

      • Anony says:

        This statement is ignorant on SO many levels:

        “To separate a newborn from their mother is a huge traumatic experience, for both of them. It’s probably the biggest trauma we as humans can experience.”

        To start with, the newborn born via surrogacy is NOT the surrogate/gestational carrier’s child (legally, socially, OR biologically). Most, if not all, IVF clinics will refuse to even allow a surrogate/GC to be the egg donor from the embryo that they carry to term. The embryos are typically created using the egg/sperm of the intended parents (or by third-party donors if one or both of the intended parents cannot contribute or if the intended parents are a same-sex couple).

        When a baby is born via surrogacy, the potential GC (the technical term for a surrogate these days is gestational carrier) goes through psych evals before they can even be approved to be a GC and before the embryos are implanted. They also have a fair amount of time after they’ve been approved before the implantation happens (the IVF process doesn’t happen overnight and doesn’t necessarily work the first time) AND there is a surrogacy agreement that both the surrogate and their partner are involved in negotiating and signing before the implantation can occur (they also work with an attorney who represents them exclusively as part of negotiating this agreement, even for GCs who are volunteering or related to the intended parents). And then they have nine-months of the pregnancy during which they can continue to deal with those emotions; in many cases the GCs will update the intended parents regularly on all the pregnancy milestones (for example, we Facetimed into all of our SIL’s appointments with the OB, especially the ultrasounds).

        And leaving all that aside since you don’t seem to understand that pregnant people are absolutely capable of managing their own emotions and making decisions about their own bodies; most of the time, the intended parents are *there* when the GC delivers their child. I was doing skin-to-skin in the hospital within an hour or two of our daughter being born (and that was only delayed bc there was a slight complication when she was born so she was in the special care nursery at first). My spouse and I were also given a room in the hospital just like any other parents would until our daughter was released and since she had trouble with blood sugar regulation after birth, my husband and I took turns sitting with her in the PICU and holding her/giving her bottles for the entire 72 hours (or so) that she was in the hospital.

        My SIL was released the same day our daughter was born and really only saw her briefly after the birth because she didn’t want to continue lactating, though after a week or so we were able to bring our daughter over there house and introduce her to our niece (who ALSO understood that her Mommy had had a baby in her tummy but that it wasn’t HER baby in her tummy). If a 4-year-old can understand that concept, trust me that an adult can as well.

        Your assumption that somehow my daughter experienced life-long trauma because she did not develop in my uterus is so absurd that its laughable. My daughter has never known another mother for the very simple reason that her AUNT is not her mother. And we will not keep that a secret from her; we will explain to her how she was brought into this world in age-appropriate ways whenever she wants to know. If anything, the process just means that my daughter has a special bond with one of her Aunts (and her Uncle too).

        It takes a village to raise a child and sometimes it takes a village to birth a child. All my daughter will know is that her Auntie was SO excited and happy to bring her into this world and for my daughter (and my husband and I) to have a family that would love her to the moon and back.

        I have no idea where you get this idea that somehow babies born via surrogate are traumatized but I can’t help but feel like you are likely projecting feelings that have absolutely nothing to do with the reality of how surrogacy works or the relationship the baby has with the GC.

      • Anony83 says:

        This is my final comment on this subject as this is all incredibly emotionally exhausting but for those comparing or equating surrogacy with adoption, there is a critical difference: a baby born by a surrogate is *not biologically related* to the GC (or, at least not biologically related in the sense that the surrogate’s eggs are not used to make the embryos).

        What’s more, the surrogate makes the *choice* to become a GC and deliver a child that is not theirs; you cannot be an accidental GC! GCs do not “give up” their own child. They go into the process with the absolute awareness that they are doing so to help the intended parents have a family. So many of the emotional complications that come with adoption simply do not apply to surrogacy (and this is also why it is not at all helpful to tell people who cannot have children to “just adopt” rather than use a surrogate. Adoption is neither simple nor unproblematic in its own right. And it can *absolutely* be exploitative, perhaps even more so than the surrogacy process. Particularly international adoptions.)

        While I understand the concerns that compensating GCs could be exploitative, I will simply reiterate that there are many, many ways that capitalism exploits the human body with far fewer protections and even higher risks for those bodies than surrogacy. If you believe that people who get pregnant should have the autonomy to make decisions about whether to get pregnant AND whether to stay pregnant – if you think that is a decision between a woman and their doctor – drawing the line that they cannot choose to do so to give someone else the chance to have a baby that is desperately wanted just because they are compensated for the very real labor they do during the entire process is incredibly condescending to all the people involved.

        Essentially you are saying that the only people who should be allowed to be surrogates are people who have money already and that poor people should be excluded because somehow being poor means they cannot make decisions for themselves. That is paternalism, plain and simple. Poor people have as much right as anyone else to choose this pathway (and trust me, people do not become GCs for money alone…it’s an incredibly complicated way to make money and it certainly is not a get-rich-quick scheme).

      • Anony says:

        For some reason my second to last comment disappeared but I want to address a fundamental misunderstanding in @ABCD and other’s comments:

        First: most of the time, the intended parents are present when the baby is born. Depending on the preferences of the GC and the intended parents, they are often very involved throughout the pregnancy as well (I facetimed into all of my SIL’s appointments and ultrasounds bc she lived out of state). When our daughter was born, we had moved to the state where our SIL lived for several months. We were not only doing skin-to-skin as soon as we could (there was a complication at birth that slightly delayed our ability to hold her) but my spouse and I took turns sitting with her in the PICU for at least three or four days as they waited for her blood sugars to stabilize and before we could take her home.

        Meanwhile, our GC was released the same day the baby was born (at her own request). Even our niece who was only 4 understood that her Mommy “had a baby in her tummy, but the baby wasn’t HER baby”; if a 4 year old can understand that, how infantilizing can you be to think that the adults involved could not.

        And the idea that my daughter suffered some kind of invisible trauma because she did not come out of my uterus specifically is absurd and would be almost impossible to prove or disprove; unless of course you had a pre-existing opinion on the matter.

        Finally, this statement is incredibly contradictory: “Now I understand that sometimes there isn’t another option, but to actually plan that your child’s life starts with a trauma wound just so it’s biologically yours is incredibly selfish.” You begin by saying that having a child “separated” from its mother is traumatic (even if the trauma is invisible) but you then go on to say that it is selfish to use a surrogate because, presumably, you think that people who cannot have children of their own should “just adopt” … a process that as others in this same thread observe can be even MORE traumatizing to both the pregnant person who actually IS giving up “their” child but also to the adoptees unless the adoptive parents work hard to help the adopted child not only fit into their family unit while also helping the child stay connected to their biological family and/or their culture (especially in adoptions that are transracial or international etc.)

        People who use surrogates do not only do so because they “selfishly” want to be biologically related to their child. (I, for example, am NOT biologically related to my daughter). There are many reasons people use GCs and one of them is that adoption is not nearly as simple as you would like to make it seem in your effort to paint surrogacy as the “real” problem.

        I know that there’s been a lot more publicity about surrogacy bc of a few celebrities who have gone that route but most intended parents who go the surrogate route are just normal people who have to work hard to afford the process and use it as a last resort. We are not all the Kardashians.

  4. Amy Bee says:

    All the best to them.

  5. Barbara says:

    Congratulations to the new parents! Also, that baby has nicer nails and cuticles than me.

  6. Hootenannie says:

    I was going to get those don’t look like the nails of someone prepared to change dirty diapers but then it’s not like Paris would ever get her hands dirty anyway.

    • Frippery says:

      Because she has a manicure? They aren’t unreasonably long or pointy.

      Moms are allowed to have nice nails without being dragged as lazy or bad for it.

  7. Trillian says:

    Did the baby have a manicure???

  8. LTR says:

    Sorry, LIA, shouldn’t the surrogate get to decide that for herself? Not fair to infantilize a grown woman who we know nothing about.

  9. BB says:

    Best of luck to the little boy. A deadbeat father and a mother who couldn’t properly care for a chihuahua. Whew.

    • Dolly McGee says:

      Exactly, I feel bad for this child. I wouldn’t want Paris Hilton as my mom no matter what privileges come with it. She can’t even take care of her pets, she’s homophobic, racist and a moron.

    • missmerry97 says:

      the nannys will be raising this child, let’s be real.

  10. Gracie says:

    Congrats. Here’s to hoping she wants to form a genuine bond with baby during the newborn stage, rather than passing off to a nanny when he gets fussy. That’s all I’ve got.

  11. Ann says:

    Congrats to Paris. She waited a long time for this and didn’t rush into marriage even though she’s been engaged a few times. Seems like she made the best decision for her lifestyle. I am very curious about the name. Conrad makes sense for her but I have a feeling it will be something original but not weird.

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      I had similar thoughts. No idea whether this (or any) marriage will last, but Paris had plenty of chances to do the “starter marriage” thing & she didn’t.

      Congrats to the new parents.

      • Liz Version 700 says:

        Yeah I mean I for one am glad Paris waited until she was a bit more mature to have kids. In her 20s I don’t think she would have been ready and bless her for seeming to know that and wait to grow up a bit

  12. Lucy says:

    Conrad makes sense as a name, tbh. Congrats to them!

    (Small quibble – embryos are transferred, not implanted. Implantation may or may not happen within the uterus after transfer.)

  13. Eating Popcorn says:

    Paris is a mom – THAT’S HOT!

  14. Case says:

    Congrats to them! I admire Paris for never rushing into marriage and babies and waiting until it truly felt right to her.

    Excited to hear his name.

  15. Osty says:

    Congratulations to them

  16. BillyPilgrim says:

    Poor kid. I hope she treats him better than she treated (treats?) her pets.

  17. Imara219 says:

    I’m not going to toss out fake concern as tepid congrats. Paris is wealthy and has, by most accounts, put in the work to improve herself. Still, we are all a work in progress, constantly changing and shifting– she has the resources to provide for her child, and she selected a relationship where she felt love and stability emotionally. I can’t believe she’s only a couple of years older than me. I seriously always thought she was more like a few years older. I’m not going to hold the things Paris did in her 20s against her. I’m not going to assume what type of mother she would be based on her actions from 15+ years ago. Instead, I’m going to say CONGRATS! She has wanted a baby and marriage for a while and has accomplished her goal. I’m happy for her.

  18. meli says:

    Ya sorry but major red flag for me if a man doesn’t have a good relationship with his existing children. Bad news.

    • Andrea says:

      It depends on the situation. What if you had a child from a one night stand and the baby lives in another area? I had a wealthy friend get pregnant on a cruise with her parents at 18(she lives in NC, he in OH). She told the father he was under no obligation to pay or see the child because it was a fling.

      • BB says:

        The situation doesn’t matter. You produced a child, you do the most you can do to be a part of his life. That’s what responsible people do.

      • Frippery says:

        Men, or persons on the traditionally male side of conception, can’t choose to have an abortion, or allow the child to be adopted. Just like we shouldn’t force women to be mothers, if a man provides financially, we shouldn’t force men who are unwilling to unable to step in to a fatherhood role. It is *not* always what is best for the child. It’s potentially a path to misery and abuse. So, I don’t judge him too harshly because he does provide financial support and I don’t know the situation.

      • LoryD75 says:

        Imagine how his daughter feels knowing her dad has met you exactly once and has tried so hard to have another child with his wife? Also apparently chose a male embryo. Talk about trauma.

    • J says:

      Meli – agree. I have no time for men who don’t maintain equal relationships with all kids barring some serious niche complication like parental alienation. I know someone whose dad and stepmom treat him like a guest and his sisters (half sisters technically) are treated like “real family” and get all the encouraging text messages, vacation Invitations. All are either fully adult or in college. So sickening. Luckily his mom and her side of family, siblings on her side, treat him like a whole family member. But it hurts him deeply. So many reminders of how he doesn’t “measure up” and that is something even a grown up never forgets

  19. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    Maybe holding a baby will help her back. She can’t seem to stand straight.

  20. Jewbitch says:

    @ concern fae

    What?

  21. Cat says:

    I’m not commenting on Paris Hilton *specifically* because each individual case is just that — an individual case— but in *aggregate* I find it unlikely that so many rich, famous women have legitimate health reasons that prevent them from carrying their own pregnancies. I’m just generally uncomfortable with the idea of wealthy women outsourcing the pain and risks associated with growing their families onto lower-income women (specifically when there is no medical reason that precludes them from a healthy pregnancy).

    • VKH says:

      Just FYI, a lot of states require a medical necessity for surrogacy. In my case, I had to submit a sworn declaration that I could not medically carry a pregnancy, and my doctor had to do the same. This was all part of the pre birth legal proceedings.

  22. Theresa says:

    Look it is none of our business how she became a mother…she is now a mother. She had her eggs harvested and implanted in a gestational carrier. None of us know her reasons for choosing this route and it is none of our business. Lets all be happy for her and her child.

    Just because you would never do that please do not denegrate any other woman for doing so. She may have a medical condition prohibiting her from being able to carry naturally, she may just not have wanted to carry for herself…either way it was her decision and she now has a healthy baby boy end of story.

  23. Well Wisher says:

    Congrats to the new parents!!#🎈🎈

  24. Googoo says:

    Commercial surrogacy? No no no no. What has happened in the US to make this seem like a reasonable thing to do? If I announced on insta that i bought a healthy new kidney from a kidney trader in Africa would everyone smile and just wish me happiness?? There are things in this world that nobody should be able to buy.

  25. KC says:

    Might be more heartwarming if he was a better parent to the child he has or if she made an attempt to bring what is now a half sister to their new baby.

  26. J says:

    100 % KC.

    And I bet the info leaked from an outraged friend of the mom/kid

    Hypocrisy is exhausting and so common

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment