Biological clock in Men...

When i was a child, I was told that it was the woman's fault if she did not give birth to a son as a first child. I saw it in Chinese movies, I saw it in most other movies...I was told by older relatives who did not know better.

If a child was born with a deformity, it was usually pinned on the mother as well.

It was not until i got to highschool and while i studied Science, did i learn that the gender of a child is determined by the father, its his sperm that carries either a X or a Y chromosome and races to the egg. If a mother fails to conceive a boy, its the father's "fault" really. (And i dont mean "fault" as in he "chose" what to happen...i just mean its his sperm that made the difference).

Learning this fact made me feel as though there was a great injustice. That women had to suffer the blame for not having a son when a son was wanted by the father and his family. But it is really the father who didnt make a son "happen". As i am older now, i see a great injustice in women having to suffer the blame for having difficulty falling pregnant and when they do fall pregnant they suffer the blame for either having complicated pregnancies and/or for having babies with some sort of deformity.

No one ever asks for a deformed child or a child sick from the moment they were born. No one. A mother, of all people, hopes and prays that she gives birth to a healthy baby with all their 10 fingers and toes, healthy heart, lungs and every other organ...you get the drift...

And it takes two people to make a baby, why does the blame have to reside with the mother? Its always the "mother" who was "too old", has anybody considered that the father was "too old"???

Which leads me to what i actually wanted to write about...

I read the paper yesterday and there was a small article in the back of the Telegraph and it spoke of "Biological Clocks". I thought "here we go again, someone telling me I'M running out of time...I wonder if they have something new for me to learn other than i'm screwed!"

As i really had nothing better to do, i read it, and i'm glad I did. It wasnt about women's biological clocks, it was about men and their biological clocks.

Studies have been done over the years and the findings indicate that men who have children in their later years, from 35 y/o onwards, are at a higher risk of fathering a child with autism or down syndrome compared to their 25 y/o counterparts.

In the past until this research was done, men were always seen as having "until the day they die" to father a child. They had an unlimited supply of sperm, while the women have only a finite amount of eggs.

Yes, there are some of those super mums who managed to fall pregnant at 50 or older. But the amount of mothers at that age is highly rare and is almost a freak of nature. Yet, seeing a father at 50 these days is seemingly acceptable. I mean, the men out there must be sighing with relief every time a bloke over 50 fathers a child. Think Donald Trump, Paul McCartney, Michael Douglas, et al. The men of our society probably see this as validation that they have at least 10-15 years left to father some children.

Fortunately for those wealthy men, their children have been born healthy.

But how many families out there are struggling with looking after a child with autism, because the father was 45 when the child was conceived?

I'm not writing this as an "I told you so" or to shove the blame on all the father's out there.

But if it takes two people to make a baby, shouldnt it be two people who share the responsibility of having a child with a disability and share the blame that they both left it a little too late?

I mean if the mother left it until she was happy with her career to then decide she wants a child, now at 35. And her hubby who is 45, is also quite happy now to be a father. Now when they fall pregnant, probably through IVF, find out that their one shot of having a baby is marred by a strong possibility of a child with severe down syndrome.

Who is to blame for leaving it too late?