For all those men that think that only women have time limit on having kids

[Eternal Sunshine]

Read this

 

Older dads more likely to produce autistic children through genetic mutations

[boaaaar]

Oh GAWD NO NOW I CAN FEEL MY BIOLOGICAL CLOCK TICKING SO YOU MADE ME FEEL AS BAD AS YOU RLY

Edited August 27, 2012 by boaaaar

[Radu]

Read this

 

Older dads more likely to produce autistic children through genetic mutations

 

I think most men know that past 35-40 their genetic material in the form of sperm deteriorates.

 

The argument is that we do not have a menopause and modern science allows us to check for some genetic abnormalities of fetuses already.

[grkBoy]

Read this

 

Older dads more likely to produce autistic children through genetic mutations

 

I could see that. However, I also think most older men who are single and want a RL will more likely end up meeting a single mom. Mainly because as we all age, women marry, divorce, or they just get knocked up...the chances of men finding the older, attractive, childless woman becomes more rare. Although this might change with the low birth rate we're seeing now.

 

I think the "time limit" logic is mainly aimed at the women who seemingly have it as a priority to find a husband and have a family, but hold on to some long heavy list of standards that most men cannot fulfill. It's simply the reality check when she's hitting 30 and no man is "good enough" in her eyes to perhaps rethink those standards and ask herself if she's become her biggest obstacle.

 

NOW...this does also then put the same pressure on men...but the men who also want their own biological children. Even take away the chances at birth defects, it still can come down hard on a man who wants his own kids, but is ticking towards 40.

 

He might first think of some younger woman, but grow annoyed with her young party girl ways as he's hoping to get married and have a family. Of course he might be turned off by single moms who especially say they do not want any more kids. Then there are those who get so comfy in a childfree life that they have the gnawing to have a family, but a life of money, travel, fun, free time, career, etc...is still more appealing to them.

 

 

The basic case I always make to both men and women is...if you want kids in your life, stop thinking "I have plenty of time" when you're in your 20s. Use that time to find Mr or Ms Right. Not to be wild, live if up, "YOLO" or whatever. Eventually you wake up at an older age and find your dating pool loaded with the very people you would never fathom...and all the ones you would fathom are married off or fell out of favor with their choice to remain "single and free".

[Eternal Sunshine]

GB, I agree with you. I don't care much for having my biological children, so if you take that out of the equation, I have just as much time as any man my age.

 

I would appreciate it if randoms didn't just assume that every woman past 30 is desperate for children. I had SO many "well meaning" men telling me: "I really feel for women over 30, it's tough for them with the biological clock and all"

[carhill]

A man's limit is more nebulous and less absolute, biologically speaking.

 

It might sound counter-intuitive but one reason I dated single mothers when younger was, upon reflection, a demonstration of their fertility. I wanted children at that time.

 

As an anecdote, I was the product of an older man/older woman marriage (my half sisters are about 18-20 years older than me) and, genetically, my father was a basket case; sick a lot of my life, smoker until dead. Still, his 43yo sperm production resulted in a healthy boy who remains that way until today.

 

I think the difference relevant to this thread is that, in my mid-50's, a realistic future possibility now, I could have children with a fertile woman. Very few women in their mid-50's are fertile and/or could carry to term. That's just biology. 'Should' is a completely different subject.

 

Every human has time limits but the realistic ones for the genders are just different in this particular area. Men currently generally die younger and that's a final and concrete limit on their fertility.

[Greznog]

More mutations vs the irrevocable end of fertility that is menopause. There's a reason we don't have a biological clock that starts to ring like an air raid alarm as we approach our 30s.

[Els]

I have been trying to say this here all along, but people believe what they want to believe. I do agree with carhill that men technically 'can' have children up until much later, but it is the 'should' that is generally the issue. Some women are still fertile at 55, but that does not mean they are advised to have children. Ditto with men at 55. And when that woman goes through menopause and is completely unable to have (biological) children, the man should really be thinking twice about having his, as well. Autism is not the only disorder that elderly men risk bestowing on their offspring.

 

That being said, I do still think that the 'biological clock' is more common in women than in men. Men in general do not seem to be as strongly against childlessness as women are. I know plenty of women whose major goal in life, or at least top 3, is to have children and a family. I rarely see men with children as their top goal. Sex, yes, relationships and perhaps even marriage, maybe. Children? Rarely. Children seem to be one of those things that many (not all, of course) men only start thinking about when they already are in a relationship, or don't think about at all.

[Radu]

GB, I agree with you. I don't care much for having my biological children, so if you take that out of the equation, I have just as much time as any man my age.

 

I would appreciate it if randoms didn't just assume that every woman past 30 is desperate for children. I had SO many "well meaning" men telling me: "I really feel for women over 30, it's tough for them with the biological clock and all"

 

It's a stereotype, unfortunately born of truth.

Not all are like that, but many are like that ...

 

And from the point of view of a man at a similar age, the women who don't want biological children are rare and you are left saying 'all the good ones are taken ... DAMN'.

[grkBoy]

GB, I agree with you. I don't care much for having my biological children, so if you take that out of the equation, I have just as much time as any man my age.

 

I would appreciate it if randoms didn't just assume that every woman past 30 is desperate for children. I had SO many "well meaning" men telling me: "I really feel for women over 30, it's tough for them with the biological clock and all"

 

I hear you. I honestly think though it's all changing with the Childfree movement and the low birth rate we're seeing in today's society.

 

My fiancee and I are on the fence with kids. I just turned 39 and she's 37, I worry about her health if she took on a pregnancy, as well as our own finances and time. Just from watching my peers who are parents...they're struggling with time and money. I'm just not sure if I want to take that on.

[kaylan]

I can freeze my sperm lol...but Im willing to adopt too, so Im not bothered.

[El Brujo]

Yep, it's true, brothers... our sperm has an expiration date. You can argue and say it's BS, but then hey, don't blame me if you're still bangin' away in your 70s and you father a kid that has the IQ of a fencepost...

 

Of course, if the kid grows up in the US, he'll probably join some Stupid People's Pride movement or something...

[fortyninethousand322]

I can freeze my sperm lol...but Im willing to adopt too, so Im not bothered.

 

Well some people don't have enough room in their freezer for that.

[Art_Critic]

I think in the end they don't really know what causes autism.. they just take a stab in the dark..

 

In my own life and possibly call it research I know of 4 men who had children in their 40's.. me included and none of those children have autism and also know of 8 people in my life that have children with autism, some met thru Mom's groups my wife goes to and none of those women are over 40 and none of their husbands are either.

 

In fact. 2 of the people we know that have a child with autism are in their mid to late 20's.

 

One of the children that has autism I have known for 15 years and is an accomplished artist.. his mother and father were both in their early 30's..

I do know of a couple who was was in their late 40's.. both of them and had an autistic child but I have never met them..only know of them.

 

So.. the scales tip for me the other way.. I know statistics.. but damn my own statistics also show that autism happens in the prime of peoples lives too.

 

Maybe some of the skewed statistics is just that a younger person will have that baby full well knowing it has autism and the older people don't want to be straddled with caring for a child after they pass... I guess that might be a reason for the stats I have seen.

 

Does genetic material have an expiration date on it.. sure...at least our common sense tells us so... we basically all know that to be around 40-45 in both men and women...

[stillafool]

There's a reason we don't have a biological clock that starts to ring like an air raid alarm as we approach our 30s.

 

I don't think all women hear it, or at least I didn't. I never wanted kids and never heard a ringing or felt the urge when I reached my 30's.

[Radu]

I hear you. I honestly think though it's all changing with the Childfree movement and the low birth rate we're seeing in today's society.

 

My fiancee and I are on the fence with kids. I just turned 39 and she's 37, I worry about her health if she took on a pregnancy, as well as our own finances and time. Just from watching my peers who are parents...they're struggling with time and money. I'm just not sure if I want to take that on.

 

I think you'd make better parents than many others.

[ThaWholigan]

My parents were 27 and 28 respectively.

 

Autism cannot be traced by things such as age of parents IMO. It's likely a hereditary thing. I have autistic cousins also.

[carhill]

Yep, same for Clint Eastwood with his much younger wife, though he was in his late sixties, IIRC. Of course, for both men, the nuts and bolts of raising offspring were/are a bit different than for 'regular guys' as they did/do live in a completely different world, practically speaking. However, their public examples do underscore the differences in the dynamic which often goes on outside of the scrutiny of society.

[The Way I Am]

That being said, I do still think that the 'biological clock' is more common in women than in men. Men in general do not seem to be as strongly against childlessness as women are. I know plenty of women whose major goal in life, or at least top 3, is to have children and a family. I rarely see men with children as their top goal. Sex, yes, relationships and perhaps even marriage, maybe. Children? Rarely. Children seem to be one of those things that many (not all, of course) men only start thinking about when they already are in a relationship, or don't think about at all.

 

I've rarely met a man who doesn't want children. I can think of 4 in my whole life. Of the men I've had a conversation with -- either friends or boyfriends -- about what they want, most of them mentioned wanting kids. Men may not make it as publicly known as women that they want kids, but in my experience, that's something that is a priority for many.

 

I think the "biological clock" is a social construct rather than actually biological. Women are taught to place their value on whether or not they can reel in a man and have kids much more so than men are. What they're actually "hearing" is the the sound of their families, tv, and movies telling them that they need to land a man and have kids before they're considered an old maid.

 

At 30, I'm still waiting to "hear" this siren call that everyone told me would start going off in my late 20's.

[Greznog]

What they're actually "hearing" is the the sound of their families, tv, and movies telling them that they need to land a man and have kids before they're considered an old maid.

 

What they're really hearing is nature about to turn off the utilities on their ovaries.

[The Way I Am]

What they're really hearing is nature about to turn off the utilities on their ovaries.

 

Yeah, cause that happens at 30...

[Greznog]

Yeah, cause that happens at 30...

 

Because it'd make sense for nature to do it three days before menopause hits rather than in the years leading up to drastically reduces fertility.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

How good a father do you think someone really is in their 70s or 80s? And I say that as a huge Clint Eastwood fan Although it is discouraging seeing senior citizens marry younger women but his money certainly compensates for that. Anyone who thinks that if Clint was a regular guy with no money and he would score a 30 year old wife would be kidding themselves. He also has the money where he can pay people to do the stuff he doesn't want to put energy toward. My guess is his wife has most of the child-care responsibilities. He certainly isn’t going to be able to run around like a 30 year old father would. Most regular guys in their 80s or 70s having kids is simply ridiculous. Even when they are rich celebrities. These aren’t even good examples to the rest of our lives.

 

Whenever this discussion comes up, I see a lot of men that want to talk about "special" cases where this older man had a healthy child. I don't think anyone argues that it can't happen. It can happen with women too. But it 's really time for men to stop believing they are infallible. This tends to be a very difficult topic among men that don't want to believe they have to worry about their fertility themselves. And we live in a culture that holds women up to a higher degree of fertility judgement then men. While men should be HELD to an equal degree of judgement about their own fertility. And maybe it’s time for men to take a little responsibility for themselves and realize that just because they can make a baby at 50, that it might not be best. At the end the day, it’s going to be his child that is going to bare the brunt of it.

 

Both men and women’s fertility matters. Men’s sperm begins to break down pretty early in terms of what society might consider “young” in a guy. I wish guys would stop ignoring this and practice some more responsibility regarding this.

[Greznog]

Taking responsibility as far as child welfare goes went out the window decades ago when women decided they could have a career, have children at 40 ( despite the even then well documented risks ) and proceed to raise them on their own despite the fact that children raised by single mothers perform worse on every single indicator imaginable when compared to children from traditional families.

 

But sure, men need to take responsibility.

[The Way I Am]

Because it'd make sense for nature to do it three days before menopause hits rather than in the years leading up to drastically reduces fertility.

 

So all knowing one, why does this biological effect kick in 20 years before hand? Why not 30 years? Why not 10 years? Why not 5? Why not one year? One year is plenty of time to get into gear and have those kids before the ovaries turn off.

 

Seems awfully coincidental that this "biological" effect kicks in right at the time that society has deemed women as "too old". You might argue that society has formed that opinion based on biology. But women are now fertile into their 50's. So why has the "biological" clock not moved along with biology?

 

And if it's biological, how do you explain why some women never "hear" it. Being biological, the cause should be attributable to specific genetic factors.

 

have children at 40 ( despite the even then well documented risks )

 

Did you even read the article this thread is about?

Edited August 27, 2012 by The Way I Am