to think rising levels of neuro diverse children in society is partly due to rising ages of pregnant mothers?

[staydazzling]

im not condeming anything here btw, i would like to make that clear. and i know this may not go down well on here, donning hard hat but whenever theres discussions about how neurological diversity in children has risen ASD, ADHD etc in society, the conversion is often about MMR Ipads or diet, discipline etc which of course all important variables but i feel its unhelpful that a lot of would be mothers are not informed of the risk past 35, of downs syndrome, autism etc, its obviously much better financially to be older and have a family. aibu to feel its the elephant inthe room regarding rising levels of children with ASD, ADHD, Etc??

It is a complete myth that there are increasing levels of neuro diversity.

You say that with a level of confidence I haven't come across anywhere.

You should have done the year long degree module I did specialising in autism then. You would have found it everywhere.

Prevelance studies carried out since the 1950/60s show a consistent level.
How was prevalence measured if not by diagnosis?

By clever sciency magic.

WheresMyChocolate
I'd find it really interesting to read the research that demonstrates conclusively that there has been no change in prevalence over time. Could you post a link?

@Devereux1 interesting that as well as knowing mental health professionals who say that ADHD isn’t genetic, despite there being a proven link, you also know children who were able to get extra time in exams without being evaluated for it simply by falsely telling teachers they had conditions.

The exams these children got extra time in: were they internal school exams? I can see how that could be possible, if rare, because schools can decide themselves who gets extra time in internal school exams. But when it comes to GCSEs, there’s strict criteria. An Educational Psychologist has to recommend it. The GCSE board have to then approve the giving of extra time.

I said it was inconclusive, the studies show a U shaped curve (with increased rates at older and younger ages and lower rates in the middle between 15-30). I have linked to graphs from studies above. Correlation is not the same as causation and ND individuals may not have typical reporductive patterns. However we do know that risk of chromosomal abnormalities increase with increasing maternal and paternal age.

Werking: Quite. Either someone is being grossly misinformed and shouldn't believe what they hear and do just a little bit of research themselves; or is making stuff up.

That should read between 25 and 30

I have four children with asd gave birth at 20, 26, 35 and 36. So no link with age.

It may well be a factor OP but without good statistical studies combined with rigorous analysis to exclude other factors you'd be hard pressed to say anything that isn't just you're idea. Which of course is what a hypothesis is. But nothing more than that.

Thanks Marvel that's absolutely conclusive that there is no link.

WheresMyChocolate I'm also interested in a link to evidence there has been no increase

I don't think you can make a statement like that unless it is backed up by research. Re Downs it is true the risks increase as the mother gets older but it is also true that most children with Downs are born to younger mothers. Also drug and alcohol abuse is responsible for a proportion of children born with learning disabilities or difficulties.i don't know if any research had been done on maternal age for that group of children

I'd find it really interesting to read the research that demonstrates conclusively that there has been no change in prevalence over time. Could you post a link?

ROTH I, 2010, The Autism Spectrum in the 21st Century Exploring Psychology, Biology and Practice, London, Jessica Kingsley Publishers

WheresMyChocolate That's being described as psychological fiction when I've gone to look it up.

chewable24 according to the Downs Syndrome Society more baby with Downs are born to mother s under 35 because the birth rate is higher for mothers under 35.
www.downs-syndrome.org.uk/for-new-parents/faqs/general/

WheresMyChocolate you have given a link to a course book.

I am looking for a link to the research l that I presume you are saying is referenced in that book

Devereux1 has been posting absolute nonsense about exam arrangements on this thread, but my favourite has to be:
'Teachers are not allowed to ask for evidence of dyslexia'

How exactly are teachers supposed to make reasonable adjustments based on a private assessment of dyslexia without laying eyes on the actual report?
In any case, a diagnosis of dyslexia does not lead to exam arrangements. For extra time based on a specific learning difficulty the exams officer or SENCO needs to input a qualifying score when applying online.
Additionally an application must reflect usual way of working in the classroom and the school must have evidence of this on file to show the Inspector.

Yeah, I pushed for an ASD diagnosis for my son so he could get extra time 😂 the reality is he will probably never take exams. It's completely i insulting to insinuate that People push for formal diagnosis so they can get extra time in exams. I'm dyslexic, I never accepted any extra time for any exams throughout university, college or school, because while I may be dyslexic, I didn't need it, and didn't want to be treated differently to anyone else.

I have two children with ASD, one will be unlikely to sit any exams and the other at least currently aged 10 would be unlikely to utilise extra time as he doesn't have the attention to sit there for the usual amount of time let alone more (they both have ADHD too).

As for the comment about cannabis use in fathers. My husband has never taken any drugs, smoked anything or had never even drank alcohol when our eldest was born. Still all true although he has had maybe a handful of beers in the past few years now.

Some of the posts in this thread are like a checklist of autism myths.

All we need now is someone to blame it on modern parenting and say it's a cover up for lack of discipline then we'll have ticked all the boxes.

There is no correlation with maternal age but I think that ND people do breed more often than they used to with respect to breeding with other ND people.
There are clusters in places where there is a strong tech base such as near Cambridge or Silicon Valley.

I am glad to have been born when I was in that I could access tertiary education which during that time was when I met my DH who is similarly ND I suspect. It is arguably easier for ND people to meet up now than in previous generations due to more higher education/the internet.

But the overwhelming evidence is that it is genetic not environmental. Having said that, abuse and some mental illness can generate autism-like symptoms that could lead to misdiagnosis.

There's a lot of really horrible posts on this thread. And I've been on Mumsnet for a long while so have quite a thick skin.

The research doesn’t support your hypothesis.

For someone with AS these threads are depressing but illuminating. I only hope that people who work for the civil service, HR people and employers in general see this thread and see the invisible walls that we AS people have to navigate like rats in an invisible maze.

AS people are no less employable than NT people of equivalent mental prowess, but threads like this show why there is such a disparity. For me specifically, being unemployed could be potentially deadly.

My autistic sibling chose not to disclose their condition when they applied for their latest job after many unsuccessful applications to other employers. They told their employer after their six mo th probation period was finished and have been in their role now for almost a year, they have recently been promoted.

It's worked out well for my sibling but autistic people shouldn't have to hide their condition or lie about it in order to get an employer to take them on.

I personally would disclose my condition but I am sufficiently fatalistic in that I do not think I can make myself any less employable.

In fact, I am actually considering applying for Dominic Cumming's call for 'Freaks and Wierdos' considering that STEM people are woefully underrepresented in politics.

AS people are no less employable than NT people of equivalent mental prowess

I'm not sure that is universally the case.

For example the anxiety and associated behavours for some (? many) autistic people can massively impact on their ability to undertake activities that their "mental prowess" more than qualifies them to do.

Based on "mental prowess" my dd could be expected to thrive academically and end up with a string of qualifications. But that isn't the case.

Her ability to manage challenging situations varies massively day to day, moment by moment. She needs extensive down time and flexibility to deal with the resulting stress from activities she is more than cabable of doing based on intellect. In fact her ability to manage even basic functions including self care, varies massively day to day.

She is not well suited to standard employment at all and her ability to earn is massively compromised in comparison to others including some other autistic people. The most inclusive of employers would struggle to accommodate her needs.