To just remind you that autism is genetic?

[robotgun]

Research tells us that 60 to 90% of the risk for autism comes from your genome. Maternal and paternal age are also a significant factor. Also genetic variants exist that cause autism-like behaviours and go undiagnosed because we don't routinely run genetic tests on our children. We also don't routinely institutionalise children that are different to their peers.

There's 'more' autism because people are having babies at older ages. And we are better at spotting autism.

It isn't heavy metals, microplastics, or the MMR.

Sorry, but it seems like every day I open this app and there's a new post saying 'What's going on with all this autism around, eh?' and a slew of replies blaming environmental factors that have no science behind them whatsoever. Or, worse, blaming mothers for reproducing too late in life or eating tuna in pregnancy or taking prescribed meds.

If you see enough of these threads every day you could well start to believe the nonsense that people write, much like people that read the Daily Mail every day start to believe that Meghan Markle is the devil.

Autism has always been here. It's not better or worse than it used to be.

There's more autism because DSM 5 changed the definition of autism to include those that were once dismissed as 'odd, weird, eccentric, introverts, highly sensitive, loners, awkward' etc etc. I include myself amongst those
I thought it was harder to get a diagnosis now though - having done away with Aspergers - you have to score highly as having a deficit in all areas now to be considered autistic? Many with autistic traits won't be deemed to be severe enough, who would have had an Aspergers diagnosis in the past?

Maybe people could just think before chucking out their bizarre theories about autism and do a little reading beforehand. That'd be nice.

To be honest that’s pretty much how your post hits.

No, it's not easier or harder, just you are either autistic or not. Some diagnoses still contain levels. So I have the diagnosis of meeting criteria under DSM, level 1. My DS has a level 2 diagnosis.

I do wonder about the way the world has changed.

As previous posters have mentioned, people with higher support needs were institutionalised in the past. But life might have been easier for those more mildly affected. My great-uncle is in his 80s and clearly undiagnosed autistic. He was able to leave school in his early teens and get a job in the local area working for people who knew him and his family. He worked in the same sector all his life. He was never interested in finding a partner, but always lived with extended family. Socialising was more predictable and I remember as a little girl being told that 'Uncle Bill' needed some time to himself when he'd go off by himself after a day of being around other people. It was just accepted. People thought he was eccentric and introverted, but he was part of a community.

I'm in my thirties, had the predictable inability to cope with secondary school in my early teens but was made to feel terrible about it and not given any other option. Find the social side and unspoken expectations of job-hunting really hard and I've been unemployed and under-employed quite a lot despite having qualifications. Anxiety and burnout, feeling alone and isolated. Difficulty coping with the pace and expectations of everyday life. I got a diagnosis because in the society I live in, my traits are disabling. I can imagine a society in which they wouldn't be, and it looks more like the past than the present in certain respects.

The science is largely in favour of genetics @TomeTome

Surely though if there’s a chance that SSRIs are affecting foetuses it should be checked out?

I’m always a bit flabbergasted that when it comes to autism - people would rather have total acceptance and no research into what may cause it, outside of it being heritable. I’m autistic, and whilst I’m a delight there are aspects of my life that are, frankly, shit, and if future generations can be told “no SSRIs when pregnant” or whatever else is found out that may have an effect on autism, even just the severity, then that’s surely a positive thing?

People with all kinds of disabilities and conditions, mental illness etc used to be put in institutions, die at a young age or be cast out of society. Now this doesn't happen and people with autism to varying degrees generally have a much better lot in life and have children themselves. It stands to reason therefore that there are going to be more people with autism.

DD2 has been diagnosed with ASD, I had her aged 33 so was not an older mother particularly and there is nothing on my side of the family (unless people are not diagnosed which is possible). DH was adopted though and we have no idea about his (genetic) side of the family.

https://news.clemson.edu/study-implicates-neanderthal-dna-in-autism-susceptibility/

This is interesting

I agree @RatHole but only if a strong enough link has been made. It's beyond doubt now that drinking in pregnancy can cause certain conditions in babies. We aren't there with autism, and until that link is strong enough it just becomes a stick to bash people with.

I've never heard anything about age. Can you say more about that? What sort of age are we talking and how much does it effect things? It doesn't ring true from my experience but of course that's anecdotal.

My DH always says that if we ever had to survive in the wild our autistic DC would thrive and we would all perish 😂

I'm pretty certain it's only fathers ages that makes a difference to autism. Not mother's age
There's loads of reputable studies on this - I can't be bothered to post them but have posted them on other similad threads

Perhaps you're not reading the same threads as the OP.

I see it regularly and I'm not on here daily.

I'm involved with a children's disability charity and have a DC of my own with SEN (although not ASD). Genetics plays a huge part and many of our families can trace ASD back through their family tree although it's often only once a child has been diagnosed that everything slots into place. I had no idea that my DF probably has undiagnosed SEN until my DS was struggling as he'd learned to mask. Most of us will remember the 'weird' kid at school who may well have had SEN.

Other factors likely to contribute are increase in parental age (generally thought to be DF's age as opposed to DM's age although the two are often linked). Premature and disabled DC surviving that wouldn't have survived previously. There are also social factors like more women going into previously 'male' STEM jobs or university courses. Some of those women will have ASD, meet men also with ASD and go on to have DC with ASD. The internet has also provided a way for people with ASD who might struggle socially or have niche interest etc to meet online then get together and have DC.

It's sometimes hard to sort the wheat from the chaff in these debates but this is a good place to start www.scientificamerican.com/article/autism-maternal-age/

Interesting.

As a mental health professional, I can safely say my parents are not autistic and do not show any neurodivergent traits. My parents were 19/20 when they had my sibling and 21 when they had me.

My eldest sibling is severely autistic.
I have ADHD.

We both have childhood trauma (physical and mental) which I can safely say triggered OCD (diagnosed) and I believe neurodivergence is closely linked to trauma.

Likewise there are a lot of misdiagnosed children, who aren't autistic- they're traumatised.

And lots of undiagnosed children/adults.

More research is needed and less finger pointing.

There isn't "more" neurodivergence. Looking back to childhood, there were a lot of kids in my class who I bet were neurodivergent but not diagnosed.

We have more testing and more awareness. Not more autism.

What is SSRI?

My son is diagnosed asd my husband is exploring this now and seems to be struggling later in life, my mother in law and husbands grandad also both undiagnosed but very clearly asd.
Husbands grandad is 98 mother in law 70 they were never tested but their autisim is plain to see there isn't more autism just more awareness 🙌 I understand what you meant.

I spoke to a scientist about this. There are three main ‘causes’ of autism - two which cause intellectual disability, and one which doesn’t.

The first (Group 1) is a massive genetic mutation (or major congenital damage), which leads to children with major intellectual disability, epilepsy, etc. etc These are children who get diagnosed very early, end up in special school, and have very high support needs into adulthood. They are largely in families with no history of autism.

The second (Group 2) are ‘copy number’ genetic variations. These cause mild intellectual disability, but - again - largely aren’t uncomplicated inherited from parents. Again, the kids usually end up in special school and often have co-associated conditions.

The third (Group 3) is where the kids have inherited autistic traits from one, or more, family members. Increasingly, these kids get diagnosed in childhood and you’ll find whole families where every child, or almost every child, has a diagnosis of ADHD, autism or both. These children are healthy, of average, or above average, intelligence, and they usually have an autistic parent or grandparent. They don’t have any co-associated conditions that aren’t shared with a family member (i.e. if you get arthritis or migraines, your kids probably will).

It turns out there’s vastly more Group 3 than Groups 1 & 2, probably 10x more, but most adults in Group 3 were never diagnosed. About a third of diagnosed-autistic adults aged 30-50 registered with GPs in the UK have a learning disability. Only 10% of autistic children diagnosed under 10 do (90% don’t).

As such, there’s now a huge fight within the autism community between parents of kids in Groups 1 & 2, who view autism as a disaster that needs curing, and families of people where literally everyone is autistic (or ‘broader autistic phenotype’), who see themselves as ‘neurodivergent’, and simply requiring some adjustments to live a happy, productive life.

Most research was done on people who are now adults and, as such, most autism resources assume the vast majority of autistic people have learning disabilities. This isn’t the situation on the ground and it’s obvious that researchers haven’t yet caught up. Some of the increased diagnosis is due to changing classroom settings (e.g. talking in class for group work) along with powerful noisy new technologies, such as Dyson hand driers, which many autistic kids struggle with.

I don't think this study has tracked fathers ages - or has it? They're finding now that a lot of disorders they linked to higher maternal age are actually due to father paternal age, and once you account for that the mother's age has no impact.

It's just sexism in research. But the rigorous studies have found only a link with autism and fathers age afaik - happy to be proven wrong if there's evidence to the contrary

My DS would be group 1 in this case and me and DH group 3. Both of us have ND parents who would/will never be diagnosed.

I'm not denying the fathers age link @MsCactus, that's been studio and recognised too

Yeah I know. I just think autism is one of the rare ones that from what I've seen a mother's age doesn't influence - which I welcome because tbh they seem to blame everything on a mother's age rather than the father's age

Part of that is lots of DC being put in mainstream when they need a special school.