"As men get older, their sperm counts go down, as well as their DNA fragmentation and methylation rates go up," Dr. Aimee Eyvazzadeh, a reproductive endocrinologist based in the San Francisco Bay Area, told Salon, referring to molecular processes that can damage DNA. "And with that comes increased risks of a number of diseases that should not be taken lightly — autism, schizophrenia, ADD, ADHD, imprinting disorders."
Women have long carried the burden while trying to conceive. But as science is catching up, researchers are learning more about how age and sperm matter
Eyvazzadeh said when stories about older men in the news surface, she worries it gives the public "false reassurance" that fathering children at an old age is easy and comes without risk. Eyvazzadeh said she also suspects the public often isn't getting enough information regarding whether pregnancy was achieved. It's possible a celebrity couple did in vitro fertilization (IVF), a type of assisted reproductive technology that helps people experiencing fertility issues to conceive. These famous older dads may have frozen their sperm at a younger age, and aren't letting the public in on those details.
As men age, the genetic makeup of their sperm can change. This can increase the risk of certain genetic disorders or chromosomal abnormalities in their offspring, which can pose a health risk to the baby. Research suggests that children born to fathers over the age of 35 may have a slightly higher risk of autism, schizophrenia, and other developmental disorders. However, it's important to remember that this increased risk is still relatively low overall, and many babies born to older fathers are perfectly healthy. If you're conce
My Dad was 34 when I was born. I'm 6'3", muscular, I have perfect vision even at my age, I have no general health or mental health problems at my age. I have no addiction problems. I have an IQ of 158 and am talented in many ways. I grew up strong won the mayors cup in soccer, league championships in hockey/street hockey, was a state champion in wrestling, I have run multiple marathons, and played many sports. I graduated on schedule from school and won awards and went on to earned a number of college degrees. The only thing I struggled with was dyslexia and that is a product of having a very high IQ which resulted in the development of spacial thinking abilities before I developed language skills.
At 35 you should be fine.
I've read a lot of contradictory information on this. I think realistically they don't know for sure. There seems to be some evidence that fathering children at an older age increases the risk of certain birth defects. But this is not really a problem until men get much older than 35.
The risk increases gradually and I don't think it becomes significant until at least 50s or 60s. Even then it's not all that high. With women, there are some tests for age related birth defects. But I don't know if there are similar tests for men.
At 35-40 I don't think it's even worth thinking about. The advantages of having children at an older age probably far outweigh the disadvantages.
Opinion
19Opinion
For everyone who commented that it does not matter about the father and it's on the mom is not true. There have been several scientific studies about the age of male sperm and it being a link to autism. With that said, I do not thing 35, is the magic cut-off.
An old father will not have the energy to be a great father, other than that the risk is low, any risks comes with the family blood line. Ie dna. I have only read articles about women and high age being the issue. Not a single trustworthy article that say anything other then lower sperm count. I do you know what the egg has a protective shell against bad sperms, so as long as the female is young and fertile, the guy can be a father to a healthy kid.
But consider the family structure and the kids life. The kid will live without a father if you are too old. 35 isn't a issue but you shouldn't really do it after retirement. Even if you physically can.
Generally speaking, you should be fine at 35. My kids were born when I was 37, 39, 42 and 49. All healthy. And the age of the mother was 34, 36, 39 and 45.
But seek medical advice and read medical publications rather than asking random strangers on the Internet.
if this were the case then the first biological offspring would always naturally be the biggest, strongest and healthiest of them all
lower sperm quality only makes it harder to impregnate, the father isn't the one giving birth thus he contributes very little to any potential birth defects to the child
fact of the matter is an 80 year old man can still impregnate a 20 year old woman but a 20 year old man can not impregnate an 80 year old woman
The health risks are not a matter of opinion. If you want statistical data that will be more helpful than a public poll for determining medical information, you can find it online.
Unless the point was simply to gauge people's ignorance/knowledge level regarding the statistics.
No, men have been given this gift by mother nature that they can reproduce theoretically till the day they die. Yes sperm quality and quantity deteriorates and some studies have shown that chances of autism also increases but generally it's nothing compared to age of ovum (egg) and mother.
It is more about the women's s overall health.
A man can still father kids for a long time after 35.
Many women in their 40s are able to have kids, but do you really want to have a teenager in your 50s?
Chasing a toddler around can be very tiring, yet many couples do it.
Nope, there was a celebrity is age 83 and just became a Father and the Woman is age 29, so age is just a number unless the person is underage and of course that shouldn't be, but laws are different in many States / Countries we all know how this world can be.
Sperm can be produced up until death. Sperm count, formation, and motility may diminish with age and health. It’s more women that have to worry, pregnancies 35+ that are consider more high risk, where genetic disorders can be more prevalent. But there’s also still research being done into if sperm have the same problems.
Yes it's very risky for the mother and baby if the dad is old. Can cause a bunch of health issues. Best to have kids before 30.
And yes its late just cause the dad won't be active as much as a young dad.
Assuming that's true about sperm banks (and that sounds plausible), that doesn't tell us much by itself since sperm banks are businesses that also reject short guys, less educated guys, and less healthy guys. And 35-40 isn't 30, which is the cutoff age you suggested. Also keep in mind that a person's chronological age doesn't necessarily correlate to their health, so sperm banks are just playing the odds in trying to find the sperm with the greatest motility.
@Avicenna 30 is just being safe. And yes sperm banks have a lot of rules since they want the best quality sperm.
And honestly even without the fertility part like who seriously wants to be changing diapers and going to kinder drop off in their 30-40s? Like I'm trying to be a grandma at that age
I changed diapers at those ages. It's not the end of the world. When I didn't want to do it was in my 20s.
Like I have told you before, what works for you doesn't necessarily work for others. Sure, it's great to have your kids when you're young, but not everyone wants or can do that.
And making sperm banks the arbiter of who should have kids or not is ridiculous, and so it having an age cutoff of 30 for fathers. It's not as if anyone younger than 30 is necessarily in great health and has "great genes". Note also that someone my age who's still in great shape may actually be better to have a kid with because you know the children will have "good genes", whereas with a young guy, you don't know what he will be like at 40 or 50- maybe by then he will have fallen apart physically.
The people who wait till later are being selfish thinking of themselves being ready and not what life is gonna be like for their childern. It's not fun having old parents. I went through that and would not personally put my own childern through it.
And you could easily look at grandparents to see how "good" the genes are. Not really something I look for cuz at 40-50 life is almost over for most people. If they are fallen apart that just means they've lived a full life
@Avicenna
A mans best healthiest sperm is from teens to 25. After 25, sperm quality slowly declines. There is proof that kids born to younger dads tend to be healthier physically and mentally throughout life. Kids born to older fathers tend to be at higher risk of mental illnesses and higher prone to certain diseases as they get older. Even if your child is born without birth defects or autism , it doesn't mean it is equally as resilient as a kid created by a younger man
Someone who truly loves and cares for their precious children will not have kids at an older age.
@nastyb: Let me ask you this, at what age do you think men and women (respectively) should stop having kids?
Can you define exactly what you mean by "resilient"? And please cite your sources of this "proof". I'm not saying that it is false, but I think you have most likely mischaracterized the difference, much as Apple did above.
www.med.stanford.edu/.../...eased-birth-risks.html
@Avicenna
The Malaysian Mental Health Survey (MMHS) results, which were published online in March 2011, for instance, revealed that people with older parents as well as those whose fathers were at least 11 years older than their mothers, were at increased risk for certain mental health disorders, including anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder and phobias. Offspring whose fathers were 19 or younger when the child was born had just a 9 percent prevalence of mental health disorders. Regardless of paternal age, however, if the father was 11 years or older than the mother, that rate jumped to 24 percent. The greatest risk of mental health disorders—42 percent—was seen in the children of fathers aged 50 and older, with wives at least 11 years younger than their husbands.
www.scientificamerican.com/.../
@Avicenna
Older fathers' children have lower evolutionary fitness across four centuries and in four populations
royalsocietypublishing.org/.../rspb.2017.1562
@nastyb: Anyone who actually reads the entire article, much as I expected, that you have oversold the case due to your personal biases.
For example:
"Although this convergence is interesting, it is also cautionary for men over 40 who want to start families or have more children. Experts, however, offer some reassurance: "Late fatherhood is a secular trend across many nations," McGrath says. "We all know older fathers whose children turn out just fine."
In fact, Malaspina points out that duration of marriage and being "wanted" (rather than the result of an unplanned pregnancy) are two factors that seem to be protective against the development of schizophrenia in the children of older men. "Based on research I did in 2001, being wanted reduces the risk of schizophrenia threefold in these children," she says.
"People should have children if they want them, but they need to be aware of the individual risks. People have always focused on maternal age, but now we know that paternal age matters, too. This is a true paradigm shift," Malaspina says."
Like a lot of things in science, there are disagreements. And you've cited research published 12 years ago, so something more recent would have been better.
So, at what respective ages do you personally think men and women should stop having children?
Al Pacino, Billy Joel, Mick Jagger, and other men were fathering children well into their 60 and even their 80s like Pacino. Also, don't listen to the dumb whores in the comment section who are claiming it's men sperm that cause genetic defects when it has been proven over and over that it's women's rotting eggs past the age of 35 is what causes many of the genetic defects in children.
There is proof that kids born to younger dads tend to be healthier physically and mentally throughout life. Kids born to older fathers tend to be at higher risk of mental illnesses and higher prone to certain diseases as they get older. Even if your child is born without birth defects or autism , it doesn't mean it is equally as resilient as a kid created by a younger man
Not in the slightest bit. My partner is 32 and we’ve talked about children a lot and what would happen if one of us were to die. For the most part, it’s not even an issue anymore like it used to be back in the day.
Yeah it could be.. men age just like women.. though it is a myth it is all only on the women's age that babies get defects..
My dad had me when he was 34 yr old and had my sister when he was 36 yr old. Both of us are quite healthy with no defects at all.
No risk at all for the baby. And I’ll tell you from experience having a baby later in a man’s life is a better experience. You are more established and can spend quality time with your baby.
Not at all. Most men wait until they’re financially stable to have kids, which is wise to me.
Had my first at 37. My OH was 41. We had our second 18months later. We have 2 beautiful kids, no major health issues so far.
There is proof that kids born to younger people to be healthier physically and mentally throughout life. Kids born to older people tend to be at higher risk of mental illnesses and higher prone to certain diseases as they get older. Even if your child is born without birth defects or autism , it doesn't mean it is equally as resilient as a kid created by a younger couple
Where'd you get THAT screwy idea? Jerry Lewis had a couple more kids when he was in his 60's!!
@FunkyMonkee
sperm has a sell by date for decent offspring. if you want healthy kids, do it by a certain date.
I had my one and only son when I was 39.
He's a fine example of a man now that he's 25 years old.
Lol if anyone told you its a bad age, they are so wrong. My parents were 39 and 40 when they got me. Many people here get their kids in their mid 30s
No, unless he's the one giving birth.
It is for a woman.
I’m pretty sure it depends more on the age of the mother
Mans age really doesn't matter... Its the womans age what can be the risk... but i wouldn't be worried until the 40s for sure
I'm not sure I always thought it had more to do with the mother's age.
Even a 50 year old can make a healthy baby as long as he himself is healthy along with the woman he is getting pregnant.
Men's age doesn't affect as much Charlie Chaplin had his last child in his 70s
People should have children before 30 ideally, but before 35 as a last resort. I hate being a dried tard cum baby (my parents were 38)
Considering how the economy is going in most of the world right now, more adults are either having children much later in their lives or not having kids at all.
It's intersectional feminists that's about that life.
@Apple1996 It is one of the many reasons I say feminism is an evil ideology because it promotes old-ass people having babies
Feminists are also a big part of the reason so many little boys are circumcised
Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino just had babies in their 80s.
Man's age usually isn't correlated with the health of the baby
No. It's a lie women tell themselves because they have a biological clock and finite period in which they can produce offsprings.
I think it’s a risk for everyone.
no that's really standards honestly
no… not from what I know lol
no 35 is not too old.
Nah not a big deal at all.
When did men start having babies?
I fathered my sons at 33 and at 36
Not at all
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
