Nicole Kidman & Keith Urban Welcome The Birth Of A Baby Girl


Um … got some surprising news for all y’all today … TMZ is reporting that Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban, who were both in attendance at the 2011 Golden Globe Awards last night, are the proud parents of a newborn baby girl who was birthed in Nashville, TN last month! The couple are the biological parents of their new baby who was born via surrogate mother! They had a baby, y’all!!

Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban have a new baby, courtesy of a surrogate … TMZ has learned. Sources tell us … the baby was born at Centennial Medical Center in Nashville on December 28, 2010. Her name is Faith. Kidman and Urban are Faith’s biological parents. We’re told Nicole and Keith went into the hospital on the down low last week, visiting Faith and the surrogate during her stay. They entered the hospital through the back, took the service elevator to the top floor, which they rented exclusively for themselves. We’re told the baby is home … Keith and Nicole just released a statement to TMZ saying, “Our family is truly blessed, and just so thankful, to have been given the gift of baby Faith Margaret. No words can adequately convey the incredible gratitude that we feel for everyone who was so supportive throughout this process, in particular our gestational carrier.”

Yay!! Congrats and WTF? are in order for the happy new parents … I mean, first — yes, I am very happy to hear of the newest addition to the Kidman-Urban family but … secondly, WTF? This news is seemingly out of left field. I don’t think the couple gave any inkling that they were having another child via surrogate so, yeah, this is a shock. Still, I am so happy that Nicole and Keith are new parents again (and that their other daughter Sunday Rose has a new little sister). Let’s send all our love and congrats their way today.

But still … WTF?


  • Debho

    Just saw this on Sunrise! Congrats to them and welcome to Faith Margaret.

  • Denise

    I’m glad they gave her a nice, normal name.

  • blaqfury

    Congrats to the couple!

    Does Nicole have any type of custody of Conner & Bella, cause I hardly see them with her or Keith, everytime they’re photographed its with Tom or Katie. Or maybe I just always miss the photos with Nicole!

  • Zanne

    I’m not surprised they kept it on the down low after the horrible experience Matthew Broderick and Sarah-Jessica Parker’s surrogate had when it came out that they were “expecting” again. And let’s not forget that Nicole’s two teenage children w/ Tom Cruise also have a new little sister! ;)

  • Zanne

    I’ve often wondered about Connor and Bella too, blaqfury, b/c you hardly see them w/ either set of parents. On the one hand, it’s nice that they seem to be able to keep away from the scrutiny of the media but on the other, it seems like it would really bother them that their younger siblings are always splashed all over the media while they’re never mentioned at all. Whatever the nature of the relationship w/ their parents and step-parents and new siblings, I just hope it’s a good one.

  • aimie

    kudos to them keeping it to themselves. congrats to them all! yay!

  • Erin

    I can’t remember where I saw it, but around a year ago Nicole Kidman gave an interview where she said that she was sad that Conner and Bella chose to live with their father in LA but that she understands that LA is fun for teens. She also said she wished that she got to see them more. She also made a comment about them being raised in Scientology (she didn’t like it). Just google Nicole Kidman talks about conner and isabella and it should come up somewhere.

  • nicole

    holy, congrats to them on keeping this so quite. at first i was like wtf? when was she ever expecting…but then i read surrogate and it made sense lol.
    congrats to them on the newest addition :)

  • Faith

    I personally thing that’s a fabulous name for the little surprise baby! ;)

  • rOXy

    awwwwww….wassa matter bunky? Did you get deprived of a baby bump watch? No…seriously…I’m with you…wtf? I am happy for them and everything, and they were successful in keeping the news out of the media frenzy, so good on them. Can’t wait to see the little punkin.

  • Kells

    That’s wonderful for them!! I’m glad they were able to keep it private, even if for a little while.

  • Sanchez

    I would be beyond mortified if I were on anyone’s bump watch. I don’t want people staring at my stomach as it grows.

  • kendra

    That’s crazytalk! I wonder why the surrogate..It’s not like she doesn’t want to be preggo in order to keep her figure since she just was a while ago..Meh..It doesn’t matter..What a little blessing! And she looked GORGEOUS last night at the Golden Globes! I guess her happiness made her glow even more.. :)


    This is just my opinion, BUT if you can have kids then you should have kids if you want them. However, using a surrogate is completely lazy in my opinion… How can you even bond with a baby if it’s just handed to you? For the mother, I mean, ’cause you grow with your baby and bond with he/she while it’s in your stomach. I dunno. I just think it’s lazy when couples choose surrogates when they don’t want it to interrupt their career(s) in one way or another.

    • kendra

      It’s possible that they tried and couldn’t, eh? I mean, maybe it was a miracle she got pregnant last time and it just wasn’t working for them this time around..Let’s face it..She’s no spring chick! But I agree that if you can have them, have them..I’m looking at you, Camille Grammer!!

    • Tom

      Nicole is the biological mother of this child so she obviously could have carried the child but chose not to which to me personally seems weird. Nonetheless, congrats to the new parents!

    • Dezden

      That’s what I was going to say. I don’t know that they lazily chose surrogacy; Nicole is 43, and Nicole and Tom Cruise did adopt their first two children, so it’s plausible that it really was a miracle with Sunday. Sooo… who knows. I don’t think it’s right to judge in this situation though. That’s just my opinion.

    • Stephanie

      Just so you know, there are things that can happen during a pregnancy/delivery that can make it impossible to carry another pregnancy safely. Nicole obviously bounced back quickly after Sunday so I doubt that pure vanity was at play here. Not safe to make assumptions about people, even when they are in the spot light. Congrats to them on their miracle; however it happened is up to them. And PS – mother’s CAN bond with children that are “handed to them,” it’s called adoption.

    • perdiz

      well just because its her biological child doesnt mean she can actually have children. it just means there is nothing wrong with her eggs. like in baby mamma she could just have a uterus not suitable for breading. that being said i think that in that case it would be better to adopt. that way a child who has no home/family gets a great place to live and more children are not brought into the world. there are plenty of children out there that need love.

    • Dee

      I love uterus breading…lol!

    • rOXy

      I remember reading something about how it’s difficult for Nicole to carry a child to full term. Perhaps it was medically advisable to use a surrogate to protect the health of both her and the baby. Just because her eggs and Keith’s sperm are viable, does not mean Nicole can carry to full term. A child was brough into the world, and she will be loved and cared for. We should celebrate their happiness and not diss them. Their reasons are private and that part of their lives is none of our business.

    • J

      Wow what an arrogant prick. I think it’s prettttty clear that Nicole has struggled with pregnancy. Hence the adoption and like others are saying, Sunday Rose was a miracle for Keith and her. I’m about 99% sure she has mentioned the struggle of some sort in an interview before.

      Some people, even from a young age as young as being a teenager have troubles with their eggs and uterus. How? Because a family member I know has had trouble since being a teenager. It gets harder as women get older and whilst its getting more common for a lot of woman to get pregnant in their 40s – its just as common for woman in their 40s to not be able to get pregnant. Stressful and depressing times for a lot too especially with adoption.

      Don’t be so naive and rude and perhaps whilst your at it, pull your head out of your arse. That fact you purposely but “YOUR OPINION” at the beginning still doesn’t make up for the fact that your very immature with your statements.

    • Zanne

      Chase, I realize that what you were trying to say didn’t come out quite like you intended but I hope you realize that some of the things you said were very offensive, even if you didn’t mean them to be. By saying that you can’t bond w/ a baby unless it grew in your uterus, you’re implying that adoptive parents, step-parents, and biological fathers do not have a bond w/ their children. There are all kinds of families today so we all need to be respectful of them however they’re formed. And to Tom below, viable healthy eggs do not necessarily equal the ability to carry a child to term.

    • Sarah

      Kidman’s been pretty open about her problems with pregnancy. From the miscarriages to the ectopic pregnancy, she’s had a tough time getting pregnant on her own. I think it was laziness (and insensitivity) on your part not to research this.

      I’m happy for her and Keith. They seem to love being parents and this is fantastic news for the couple!

    • Alys

      There are increased health hazards with bearing a child at 40+. It could very well be that the doctors suggested this for Nicole as an alternative because she had troubles with Sunday Rose, or any host of medical factors. We aren’t her physicians, we don’t know. It’s extremely harsh to say surrogacy was lazy or chalk it up to a pretty figure thing. She has a history of pregnancy difficulties, and just look at the trauma other celebs (Celine Dion, Lily Allen) suffered from miscarriages. It could well be that this was prescribed as an option for any number of reasons, but at least the baby’s healthy and all are well.

    • beachmaus

      I agree, I can understand using a surrogate IF you can’t have a child due to illness but to use this as a convenience is purly lazy! If this wealthy couple want children so badly there are lots who need to be adopted out there! But of course they wouldn’t have the “perfect” genes these peeps believe they were given! I am happy that the child is healthy and all is well in the Urban household, but seriously believe these folks who are most likely staunch Dems, might consider spreading the wealth a bit to the less fortunate children who are already breathing.

    • Debho

      @beachmaus, are you serious? You obviously have never read anything about Nicole or Keith. If you had you would know about her problems regarding being pregnant. As for adoption, Nicole already has two adopted children. This couple is very unpretentious. And what does it matter which political party they lean towards? Besides, both are Aussies, so probably don’t vote on either.
      You just made yourself sound like a complete fool

  • @Chase- i’m sure adoptive parents would have a problem with that comment, along with other surrogates.

    for the most part its nice to see positive comments on this :)

    totally out of left field, BUT I remember they were super private about Sunday’s birth so my guess is they are just really private people.

    who cares why they chose surrogate? we can all speculate but we’ll never know the real answer until they decide to share.

    congratulations to the whole family!

    • CHASE

      People usually adopt if they can’t have kids on THEIR own, so they turn to adopting and surrogates provide a nice service if one cannot carry a child, but if you CAN carry and child and simply chose not to because of the pain, stress, etc. is REALLY lazy to me.

    • Diana

      But where does the assumption of laziness even come from? Just because they were able to have a child on their own last time does not mean they are able to now. We do not know Nicole’s medical history, perhaps she has something we don’t know of which makes it health-wise not favorable for her to carry a child for 9 months. We just don’t know so I think it is unfair to speculate “laziness.”

  • Zanne

    I agree w/ Diana. It’s not uncommon for a woman Nicole’s age not to be able to carry a child to term, even though she was able to do it a few years ago. I think that’s very petty and irresponsible to assume that she must be lazy to have a baby through surrogacy. Weren’t Sarah Jessica Parker’s twins born through surrogacy after she’d given birth to her first son a few years ago? I believe that older mothers are more at risk for things like gestational diabetes so maybe it was something like that. (And although gestational diabetes can usually be controlled through diet and/or medication, those babies still have a higher risk of preterm death)

  • Aimee

    Yeah, Nicole MUST be super-lazy because they used a surrogate, it couldn’t possibly be that there are a ton of medical reasons why a woman can’t carry a child even if her eggs are viable. WTF?

    Congrats to the new parents, I’ve always loved Nicole!


    Does anyone know how to read? I am basically implying that if she (Nicole) is healthy and can carry a kid successfully but CHOSE not to be pregnant (in terms of not wanting to go through the pain, labor, gaining weight, because she’s a movie star and she didn’t want to simply carry the child because it’s a hassle, etc.) then that is not cool. If she has a medical problem etc. then of course it’s acceptable for her to consult a surrogate and go that route.

    • J

      Its acceptable regardless. Even if a woman is able to carry they still hold the right to have a surrogate. Depending on the laws of their country of corse.
      Don’t make assumptions without knowing the facts – your exactly like the gossip magazines.

      A woman and a couple have their own reasons for what they do – reasons that should be kept private and between them and whoever else is involved. Whether they chose to so they could continue working or what nor OR whether it was (the most likely example) medical reasons, they still it should be KEPT private.

      STFU comes to my mind right about now for you!

    • Kristin

      We can all read, you’re just upset and ranting about something which you are just completely assuming, and which is probably not true…yeah she didn’t have a kid on her own so your first thought is that she’s lazy and doesn’t want to gain weight because she’s a star?? That’s just completely ignornant to say. Oh my god my worst fear in the world would be finding out I can’t have a baby on my own, and if that was the case for Nicole then I’m sure she was completely HEARTBROKEN…I’m sure she would trade spots with that surrogate mother in a second.

      On another note, this is surely surprising news but very happy news at that! Congrats to Keith and Nicole and their little family!

  • Debho

    Nicole has always expressed her desire to have her own children. She had a miscarriage while she was with Tom Cruise and maybe she’s had more since then. Not every woman wants to advertise this and knowing how private she is, I’d assume this to be so. After the age of 40 it gets harder to fall pregnant and can be even harder to carry a baby. I seriously doubt it has anything to do with laziness or the unwillingness to lose her figure. Anyway, she hardly even showed when she was pregnant with Sunday, so I don’t think this is an issue. Some of you fellows are showing your ignorance regarding women and child bearing. To most women the inability to carry a child is heartbreaking and I don’t see Nicole as being any different to any other woman on this point. However, the bottom line on this story’s no ones business why they chose a surrogate. This child will be loved and cared for and that’s all that matters.

    • Shavonne

      I so agree with you, Debho. I’m happy for the Urbans, and happy for Faith also. At Nicole’s age, she should still have usable eggs. But at 43, carrying a child could mean a miscarriage, a stillborn, a preemie, Down Syndrome, and a host of other complications. By choosing a younger and healthier uterus, they are giving their daughter a HUGE upperhand of being healthy. And that’s pretty respectable to me.

    • J

      Exactly right here – not only that a history of miscarriages, if she has had more than 1 can complicate things even further. Some can be lucky and can have a few miscarriages and still give birth down the track or not long after, same with abortion. But it can and does affect a lot of woman.
      We can make assumption over assumption here, more about medical history etc.. which a more reasonable assumption at the most.

      But seriously – the assumption he made was down right, well, unnecessary.

    • Kells

      As someone who is currently undergoing fertility treatments (for the past two years), I’d like to clear some of the misconceptions up (no pun intended).. First of all, it’s the eggs not the uterus that will determine things like down syndrome. as a woman ages, her egg quality begins to deteriorate, but they do have lab tests that will tell you the quality of your eggs, which of course, will not guarantee you still not having a bebe w/ Down Syndrome. That being said, there could be a myriad of medical reasons Nicole cannot carry her child to term. She could have fantastic eggs, but her cervix may have problems, her uterus may be icky, who knows.
      The subject of infertility is such a personal one and can be very painful. I don’t blame her a bit for keeping her bidness private, she has no reason to need to share with anyone besides her husband and docs and whomever she chooses to, her story. I really don’t think that vanity or laziness is why she used a surrogate, or at least, I HOPE that’s not why, but again, that’s not our business.
      In the case of gestational diabetes, you don’t know if you’re going to have it until you’re preggers and then it’s usually controlled w/ a combination insulin and diet. Or you can be lucky like me and have Diabetes before you get preggers! HI 3 shots a day! :-) Anyway, I’m not an MD, but just putting out what I’ve learned from my years of fertility treatments…. Of course, everyone’s experience is different, but this is just my opinion..

  • katy

    Wow, this is the last place I’d expect a debate on the ethics of using a gestational carrier! Totally agree that the Urbans’ choices in how they build their family are none of our business. This discussion is a prime example of why they would have wanted to keep things as private as possible.