Do social conservatives know that it is better for the health of the child to have young parents?
January 13th, 2006 | by Michael |
Alex asked:
It seems like those of us who are waiting to have children until we are financially stable we are at greater risk of having children with chronic diseases. The father 's age is important to the health of the child. Autism, when it is not already in the family, is linked with older fathers. So are many cancers and other illness that affects the nervous system. Women are interested in this? There is a lot of research in many years, but prevent the disease is not financially advantageous to be below the radar screen. More young teenager does not mean to me, it means 22-35. Oldest average 36 and above.
It seems like those of us who are waiting to have children until we are financially stable we are at greater risk of having children with chronic diseases. The father 's age is important to the health of the child. Autism, when it is not already in the family, is linked with older fathers. So are many cancers and other illness that affects the nervous system. Women are interested in this? There is a lot of research in many years, but prevent the disease is not financially advantageous to be below the radar screen. More young teenager does not mean to me, it means 22-35. Oldest average 36 and above.
7 Responses to “Do social conservatives know that it is better for the health of the child to have young parents?”
By Pablo on Jan 16, 2006 | Reply
I agree. It is much better if the parents are young. One of my biggest regrets is not getting married and having kids earlier.
I would have more energy for my kids, and they don’t care if you’re rich, they care if you’re there for them.
By Morey000 on Jan 17, 2006 | Reply
Interesting.
In all the articles I’ve read on Autism- I have never heard the correlation with older fathers.
I’m interested, but skeptical.
By BABBY on Jan 19, 2006 | Reply
I don’t think so, only when you are ready to have a child. Most young people aren’t ready to have children and thus they become bad parents or absent parents, then where would the child be or to cope?
By swiss girl on Jan 21, 2006 | Reply
It is also responsible Adults thjat wait to have a Child so that they can raise them properly. The trend is no longer marrying and having kids in your early 20’s, with many good reasons to.
By Hottie! on Jan 24, 2006 | Reply
yeah health and physical wise. but when you are older, you know more (assumption) and have more time to devote to parenting. I dont want to be one of those parents that have children as “friends”
plus, i have never heard of a young couple trying for a baby, pregnancy is usually an “accident” at that age range
My father was in his mid 50s when he had me, and because I was active as a child I kept him running even today in his 70s he still rides his bike and me and my little brother are healthy people! when your older you can devote more time and money to your child as far as health problems. the balance between childhood and career is more balanced when your older because you have the experience to gain jobs where as a youngster, you are still trying to get in the door
By Rio Madeira on Jan 26, 2006 | Reply
It’s not good for the child’s psychological health. Children who live with teen parents have a higher risk of being abused, therefore leading to behavioural and developmental complications down the line. (I’m a liberal, by the way.)
By draecoiram on Jan 29, 2006 | Reply
i guess it’s a good thing i married a younger man, since i did wait ’till i was stable.