A friend who used to make fun of my interest in genealogy made the following remark--- It costs $ 10.00 to look it up and $ 100.00 to shut it up. So best not to look if worried about what one might find. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mitzi Allen" <lew977@yahoo.com> To: <PACE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 4:11 PM Subject: [PACE-L] Older "mothers"? > My mother-in-law had children her last three children at the age of 42, > 44, and 47, and two of the daughters were old enough to have borne > children, but this was not the case. She also had the last child at a > specialty maternity hospital in NY that dealt with difficult > pregnancies. And I myself was born when my mother was 42 and my oldest > sister, who was 16, was shocked, embarrassed and indignent! A long > time family joke. > > On the other hand, my g-grandmother had her last child at the age of 48 > and had an unmarried daughter of 19 (who never married). In this case, > though there were 10 children born very close together, there was then > a gap of 8 1/2 years until this last child, which does make this birth > very suspect. > > Before coming to a quick conclusion, check to see when the next to last > child was born, and what the usual gap of years was between births. > There's an old Irish conviction that it's best not to delve too deeply > into your family history for fear of what you'll find. I heard that > often researching my husband's family in Ireland. > > Mitzi in Seattle > > > ==== PACE Mailing List ==== > To subscribe or unsubscribe send email to PACE-L-request@rootsweb.com with the one word message: subscribe OR unsubscribe > For digest mode, use PACE-D-request@rootsweb.com > >