Older fathers and potential mental/autism risk!

[mspanky]

 If I get to father 3,000 kids, I'll be a millionaire and give you a kickback.

Ok, noone has answered my question. How many of you know mothers  who had children over age i 35 in the U.S. that have down syndrome. This is supposed to be a very high risk age but I have yet to meet someone who says this dstatistic is right. Are sceintist making stuff up?

[Misha]

If I get to father 3,000 kids, I'll be a millionaire and give you a kickback.

Ok, noone has answered my question. How many of you know mothers  who had children over age i 35 in the U.S. that have down syndrome. This is supposed to be a very high risk age but I have yet to meet someone who says this dstatistic is right. Are sceintist making stuff up?

There is another theory that there is a link between Autism and Vitamin D: http://www.vitamindcouncil.com/health/autism/vit-D-theory-autism.shtml. I have read the research in other articles, but the idea is the same: a bit of sun can do a lot of good. Research has also showed that Vitamin D plays a role in reducing the risks of breast cancer. So, if you are worried about old sperm, you might as well compensate by making sure the mother and child will have adequate levels of Vitamin D :-)

[Eastguy]

All the rest of research points toward the age  and endrorine system of the mother being the near sole determinator of the childrens health.

[Kuna]

My friend's wife had her first child at 38 or 39 and thankfully everything was fine... I thought it was a big gamble when he told me they were trying for a second.

She fell pregnant - miscarried, pregnant again - miscarried again, pregnant again - miscarried again... I think they kinda got the hint from mother nature that they were pushing their luck.

Still... today they are very happy watching their perfectly healthy 5 yr old grow...

[Eastguy]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20822095/

[Muj]

BillyB good point, must be worlwide.
Most miscarriages are due to a defect in the child not behaviour by the mother.

[Mamma D]

I think it is more a matter of heredity, than age related....

My family has a couple of dozen kids, who were born when mom was mid-life and dad in his fifties..... All are well above the average in intelligence and healthy....

As adults, most of them are well educated and hold high level positions...

The grandchild we lost last year was 11...She tested into the collage level in both reading and Math abilities...Mom was 42 and dad 49.....

So don't write these kids off.

When I worked in one of the biggest mental hospitals in California....we seemed to have as many younger parents with disadvantaged kids as older.

I think it is a myth or Old Wives tale.

[ScottinCrimea]

So 1 out of every 33 children born in the US has a birth defect?  I have an extremely hard time believing this. All you need to do is look around you to see that this isn't true.  Keep in mind that this is the March of Dimes reporting this, and their existence depends on donations and government grants.  The more need they can show for their services, the more money they can get.  There have been several consumer complaints about how this organization spends its money and who profits from it.  for example,

"The March of Dimes has taken in nearly $700 million for birth defects at its annual WalkAmerica fund-raising walks since 1970. While the charity has pumped millions into researchers’ bank accounts, the rates for many birth defects are going up, not down. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tracked 38 different birth defects over a ten-year period and found that 27 have increased, 9 have stayed the same, and only 2 have dropped"
 and:
"According to records for 1995, March of Dimes president Jennifer Howse’s annual salary was $200,184, plus benefits."

So of course they are going to be selective on their studies and manipulate data any way they can to justify their existence and need for more money (higher salaries).

[SANDRO43]

So 1 out of every 33 children born in the US has a birth defect?  I have an extremely hard time believing this. All you need to do is look around you to see that this isn't true.

Mabe they're kept a home and not much paraded around, unless it's strictly necessary, considering our society's emphasis on health and fitness ?  You may object and cite the obese, but they don't consider themselves unhealthy (until it's too late, that is ).

[Muj]

Scott,

1/33 may be accurate as it may include any congenital defect.  I've had more than a few friends remedied by surgery throughout their lives for birth problems.  Probably some dont even mention their problem.
But defining a birth defect is probably open to interpretation, especially one fully covered by insurance.  For instance a large mole may be a defect to the bearer but not to the insurance company.  I'm sure the March of Dimes wants tighter tolerances on defining defects.

[Mamma D]

I don't know. There are a whole new generation of women over 35 having kids. In fact having kids later in life seems to be the norm. Yet, I can't recall; anyone I personally know who has had a child at the age of 35 or over to have one with down syndrome.

   Can anybody think of someone they know with this situation?  We accept what were told as facts. In fact,many men I know will purposely avoid women close to 35 when they are in the search because they want kids. I mean men close to 50.

Women of the 1920's ( and earlier) to 1940's, never heard of birth control.....and yet, there are no more of us that were born during the "change of life",  that are damaged than there were those born during the middle teens to early twenties...

In my entire extended family,( I do genealogy, and my records go well back, with health being on of my focuses) and my records show we have no physically or mental damaged children....
It is possible that the more chemicals and pollution have now, may be one of the causes...
my dad was 53 when I was born and my sis came 2 years later....mom was 47. We both are degreed and held rather high positions in our fields!

[ScottinCrimea]

I can cite that in over 300 deliveries that I have performed personally, including many high risk pregnancies, I only had one that had any congenital defect, which was a cleft palate.  Maybe I've just been lucky?

Sandro, here in the US there has been a high empasis on "mainstreaming" those with handicaps, encouraging more interaction with the general population rather than sequestering them and I still don't see 1 in 33.  I agree this probably includes those with minor defects corrected in infancy, but still the numbers don't add up IMO.

Now if you're claiming that obesity is a birth defect, I agree that the number would be much higher. 

[mspanky]

Mama D,

 Good point. Like my grandmother many women had change of life babies and nothing was wrong with them.

 I have posted a question of who here personally knows a mother over 35 who had a down syndrome child and noone has yet to answer. Look back a generation when many women (Especially Catholic) did not use birth control and children past the age of 40 was common. We seem to take it as law older mothers are automatically high risk at having "damaged babies". Yet when scientist points out older father may be at risk  too,noone here wants to believe it because we have not seen it.

   Have we seen it the other way around as often as we are told it happens? I see younger mothers with problem children,than older.So I am begining to wonder if it is not genetic(or drug) related rather than age.

   I don't want to limit myself to only women under 32(actually want a few years together before the child) just because scientist have scared me into believing and older women is bad news. I have met women who are in their mid 30's who would make a great wife and mother so I plan to widen my horizons.