I love health related studies, it’s one of my particular interests. I saw this one yesterday and the implications fascinate me:
Link Between Advanced Maternal Age and Autism
There’s such heated debate about whether the increase in autism prevalence numbers signal a true epidemic or just better awareness and diagnosis. It seems to me the answer doesn’t have to be one or the other, that it’s probably a little of both. Then the conversation turns to what might be causing the increase, generally morphing into a vaccines/toxins debate. I lose interest at this point because the science just doesn’t point to vaccines/mercury/toxins.
What if this is the answer to the epidemic portion of the conversation? Women are generally waiting longer than ever to start their family, preferring to see to their education first and establish themselves in their career. Does the timing of the increase in autism prevalence correlate to more women waiting to start families, I wonder? This possibility fascinates me!
Personally, I don’t see it as laying blame on the mothers again like the old refrigerator mother theory. I see it more along the lines of downs syndrome information. It’s common knowledge that as maternal age increases, chances of a baby with downs syndrome increases. That doesn’t stop women from having babies later in life, but it does inform their decision. For me, the information makes me feel better. It reassures me that I didn’t do anything to G, feed anything to G, or expose G to something that affected his brain development. It was simply a matter of timing. I firmly believe I wouldn’t have been as good a mother if I had decided to have children earlier - my life was a bit chaotic in early adulthood. I can better accept that this is just how it is. With other theories, I can’t help but wonder if G might be different. (although I really like him as he is) With this theory, I know for a fact that if I had started my family earlier, I wouldn’ t have G in my life. And that is simply unacceptable.