Autism Research: Older Parents More Likely to Have Autistic Children
Men and women who wait to have babies later in life may increase their children's risk for autism, according to a Kaiser Permanente study featured in the April issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.This study seems to be supported by a recent announcement that some cases of autism may be caused by spontaneous mutations in hundreds of different genes:The study investigated 132,844 children born at Kaiser Permanente hospitals in its Northern California region over a five-year period (1995-1999) and identified 593 children who had been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
Study results show that a mother's and father's risk of delivering a child with autism steadily increases as they get older. Women ages 40 and older showed a 30 percent increase in risk for having a child with autism (1 in 123), when compared to moms between the ages of 25 and 29 (1 in 156). Men ages 40 and older had up to a 50 percent increased risk of having a child with autism (1 in 116), when compared to their 25- to 29-year-old peers (1 in 176).
Advanced age of mothers has been associated with risk of autism in several, but not all earlier studies, according to study author Lisa A. Croen, PhD, an epidemiologist at Kaiser Permanente's Division of Research in Oakland, Calif. The role of a father's age in autism has been less frequently studied, although advanced paternal age has been associated with other adverse reproductive outcomes, including miscarriage, childhood cancers, autoimmune disorders, schizophrenia and other neuro-psychiatric disorders.
"As men age, there is an increased frequency of new mutations in the cells that go on to become sperm," said Dr. Croen. "These sporadic mutations could be related to autism risk. It is possible that non-genetic factors that are more common in older parents might also account for our findings."Could older parents really be a contributing cause to the rise in autism? If so, it seems to be the case only for a portion of the cases being diagnosed. Even so, it's cause for concer - especially for older parents who already have one child on the autism spectrum.
Are you concerned about this new research? Please share your thoughts!
Comments
Yes, I am concerned that nobody pays attention to the very large body of scientific research that says that fathering babies past 33 will result in more genetic illness. Autism has been identified with older fathers since 1980 and schizophenia since 1958. 34 was the average paternal age of the fathers of autistic children in the Gillberg study from 1980 and that was a much higher paternal age than the rest of the population.There is a vast amount of science showing that fathering babies past ones early thirties is a major factor in genetic illnesses. What is suprising is that people are not told about the male biological clock and to no one listens to the people who do warn about it.
http://themalebiologicalclock.blogspot.com/
My concern when I read an article that is supposed to be based on fact is when I read…”could be” “could be”. If it’s accurate, proven research, then state that. If it’s just more “theories and guesswork”, then just say that. Don’t confuse the two.
Interesting article, although I was 18 when I conceived and 19 when I had my autistic son and his father was 20 and my friends who have autistic children had them in their 20’s.
Perhaps older fathers tend to associate with older mothers and there is an increased risk of birth difficulties that contribute to brain injuries in the baby which result in Autism symptoms. Older women may also use fluoxetine (Prozac) more frequently than younger women and this may contribute to an increase in birth difficulties and other problems which result in Autism symptoms.
I do believe genetic reproductive structure changes with age. I don’t want to dismiss that by any means.
I do wonder, though, if the people who choose to postpone parenting until later years might, possibly, be less relationship- or family-focused to begin with and even carry more autistic traits to begin with. If a couple waits until their late 30s or 40s to have children, is it because they’re driven and career- or other-interest-focused to the exclusion of having children? I’m not saying that automatically indicates a lesser nurturing or caring role, but it might suggest a lesser overall interest in familial relationships…which opens a whole minefield, then, in finger pointing that older parents are more likely to have autistic children.
Also, if the parents are, um, less able to attract a partner until later years because of atypical social skills, then wouldn’t it make sense that they’d also be more likely to have autistic children?
Just speculating here.
“Also, if the parents are, um, less able to attract a partner until later years because of atypical social skills, then wouldn’t it make sense that they’d also be more likely to have autistic children?”
What a load of crap! A lot of people go through years of infertility to have a child, which delays childbearing. A lot of people may have a second marriage and be older and they decide to have more children. To say that they are less attractive to others is just plain stupid. They are usually more family-focused than younger couples and they feel more blessed to have a child later in life than younger couples, who take it for granted most of the time. I know, I am an OB/GYN and an “older” mom, not by choice, but because of infertility. I have given up my career to recover my son from autism.
Your comments, Anne, are offensive.
Oh, these kinds of comments really bug me! Who cares if older adults have autistic kids? What are we going to do tell them not to have kids? I think not. Plus I think this is garbage. What does this have to do with autism? Is there another study to divert the attention from the real causes? Sorry had to vent.
The interesting point about the research, IMHO, is the notion that older sperm/eggs may contribute to the mutations in genes which, in turn, may contribute to the rise in autism. But honestly, as you say, it’s a bit of a moot point – who’s gonna choose to NOT have children based on being over, say, 29 or 30 years old?!
My comments were never, ever intended to be offensive. I’m sorry they were perceived as such. I was envisioning scenarios in which older, undiagnosed Aspies marry and have children and are, genetically, more likely to have an autistic child than neurotypical parents. In that case, older parents would skew the results of the study.
In the case of parents who have struggled with infertility (and I do understand exactly where you’re coming from), there are still possible genetic reasons that would skew the higher levels of autism in children of older parents that have less to do with age-deteriorating genetic structures than with other factors, factors which might in and of themselves, independent of the parents’ ages, be more likely to produce autistic children.
Kaiser Permanente did the study.
KAISER PERMANENTE
Since I believe bundled shots like the MMR and those with the preservative thimerosal (mercury) are the “environmental triggers” that cause Autism….it does not surprise me that Kaiser (a healthcare giant) spent time and money researching an advanced-age theory. Wouldn’t want to upset the pharmeceutical companies now would we?
I would suspect more advanced age couples turn to IVF treatment than their younger counterparts. Rh- women receive RhoGam shots with every embryo transfer, regardless if a pregnacy results. This vaccine contains thimerosal (mercury) which is one reason, I believe, we see newborns and infants with delays – diagnosed years later with ASD.
ASD kids test extremely high for Heavy Metal intoxication – not a result of having older parents .
It is very common that Rh- moms also test high for Toxic heavy metals (But not the fathers, excluding other environmental factors such as air quality, drinking water, etc shared by the whole family.)
Otherwise I don’t think parental advanced age has much to do with causing Autism.
Interesting theory, not sure if it explains it all, but none the less interesting. Since many parents today are having babies much later, could explain the so called epidemic of ASD. Either way, I suppose they need to look at everything, as this is such a puzzling issue. My husband and I were both over 30 when we starting having children, we have 3 – two boys are Aspergers.
I was 24 at conception of my child with autism; friend of mine was 23 at conception with her child with autism; their respective fathers were within the same age range.
Personal experience states that this particular red herring is a bit of nonsense research; you might do better with thimerosal studies and percentage ratio to the use of mercury vs. the density in a given population of children later reported to have behaviors within the autistic spectrum; both in the current era we live in and in the 1950’s, etc…
Just a thought….and I’m surprised that this particular article had actually made print in an otherwise informative online source/guide.
thekcar – wow, your personal experience means the study with actual data should be thrown out? They aren’t saying “all cases”, they are saying you have a larger risk if you are older. This isn’t the first study to come to this conclusion.
Devin’s Mom – I suppose it is comforting to think that there is someone to blame such as a pharmaceutical company rather than nature. At least this theory has some quantitative data rather than clinging to unverified scape goats such as thimerosal. As I am sure you know, thimerosal hasn’t been widely used in the USA for several years and yet autism rates haven’t dropped.
I have had two kids that had autism. One died because he was unaware of the dangers in this world. I also have a 15 year old son “DJ” Who lives in a home for disabled children. Please send me the direct link or other information regarding this new diet. Any information will be greatly appreciated.
I am 12. I am the highest acheiver in my year at school. I have received grades higher than those expected of a 14 year old and the only thing physyically wrong with me is that I wear glasses. My father is 62 and my mother in her early 50’s Now look me in the eye and say that older parents are ‘more likely’ to have autistic children.
There may be different factors at work for women vs. men in the association between advanced parental age and autism in their children. In the case of women, those over 35 years old usually undergo additional ultrasound scans. Mouse experiments have shown that prenatal ultrasound disrupts neuronal migration, which “wires” the brain. Older first-time mothers would be more likely to undergo prenatal ultrasound scans for many reasons, such as to view follicle development during fertility treatments, to confirm pregnancy at only five or six weeks of gestation, or for genetic testing such as chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis, all of which may subject the developing embryo to increased risk. Older mothers are also more likely to have assisted reproduction, which is guided by ultrasound. If ultrasound is a factor in causing autism, it would explain why the population of older first-time mothers is more likely to have children with autism than younger mothers.
In the case of men, something as apparently frivolous as the style of underwear favored by a particular age group could be a factor, as it is known that jockey briefs, for instance, damage sperm production by causing the testes to be held so close to the body that they become overheated. Studies that indicate an association do not necessarily prove causation. However, the discovery of an association does indicate where researchers should focus additional attention.
Folks, none of this changes the fact that our loved ones have autism. We need to look ahead to try to best help our autistic children/brothers/sisters, etc.
I agree that getting to the root cause(s) is very important in this effort, but frankly, our sniping at this level is not helpful.
Let’s leave looking for the cause to whichever qualified scientists we trust, (which for each of us may be someone different with different takes on the subject). Maybe someday we’ll know more, but for now we can’t wait for this to play out before we try to be effective on a day to day basis.
As parents and caretakers, we need to focus on learning the most effective ways to keep Austistics safe in the world and safe from those who might try to take advantage or do them harm.
We need to honestly report our own failures and our successes in dealing with our autistic loved ones and be open to learning how to stop doing what isn’t working and keep doing what does work.
We should not fall for those who are clearly just trying to make a buck with incredible claims of recovery or impossible insights offering false hope.
Autism (aloneness) may better describe the parent or loved one’s experience in dealing with a loved one and their ASD, as it is so different in each case.
The reactions to stories like this are telling. It is generally accepted now that women who conceive past 40 are more at risk for certain birth defects. However, to many people, it is unthinkable that there could be any kind of male “biological clock.” It must be the mother’s fault, somehow.
The fact that older men have a 50% greater infertility rate, and children born to men over the age of 35 are subject to a greater risk of autism, bipolar disorder, dwarfism, and schizophrenia is widely known, and has been verified by research reported in numerous studies worldwide since the early 80’s. One Israeli study suggests that fathers over the age of 40 were more than five times as likely to have autistic children. Unfortunately, these risks are not widely known because they are not as widely reported.
No matter where stories about such risks are published, if comments are available, you get the same angry denials and wild speculation attempting to place blame somewhere, anywhere else than the father’s age. Children are still generally considered to be a woman’s issue, and a woman’s problem, right down to genetics.