logo
   Web Issue 3147 May 14 2008   
spacer




Parenthood can be better the second time around
ANNE JOHNSTONESeptember 06 2007

The gentle hum of activity in The Herald newsroom was shattered abruptly on Monday as the doors imploded. Through them roared what at first glance appeared to be a chariot with two small boys between the shafts. At the helm, though not what you would describe as in charge, was Michael Tumelty, the paper's veteran music critic.

With his other half away on a rare break, 61-year-old Michael had been left to cope with their three-year-old twins and, equipped with two pairs of reins, he had bravely decided to make a foray into the city. Judging from the brow-mopping going on once this cheery duo had been brought to a halt, it's a good job Michael can take refuge in various concert halls on a regular basis. Yet as one of Britain's growing band of second-time-around fathers, he clearly derives huge pleasure from his hands-on role. "I have terrible arthritis but they keep me going. Once I'm running round the park with them, I don't have time to think about it. They often exhaust me but they're also good for me."

The deal is clearly mutual. Adam and Andrew are delightful lads, brimming with intelligence, confidence and fun. Recently one of them was listening to a recording of Für Elise, and inquired if it was Mozart. On being told it was Beethoven, this three-year-old's instant rejoinder was: "Sounds like Mozart." By an odd coincidence, music and food critic Conrad Wilson also boasts a second brood and once regaled Herald readers with a description of his daughter's first birthday party, at which she wolfed down courgette soup, seafood and polenta cake.

Meeting such children, you get the distinct impression that one day they will take the world by storm. Their worldly-wise parents are a bonus.

Messrs Tumelty and Wilson belong to a distinguished group. The veteran broadcaster Russell Davies has three-year-old twins. Radio 4 Today programme's anchorman, John Humphrys, author Garrison Keillor, and actors David Jason and Michael Douglas are all older dads. This week it emerged that, following Wendy Alexander's appointment as Labour parliamentary group leader at Holyrood, her husband, Professor Brian Ashcroft, is stepping down as director of the Fraser of Allander Institute to care for the couple's 18-month old twins, Caitlin and Michael.

As he joked to journalists, at 60 and with a 24-year-old daughter from his first marriage, he feels less like a "new man" than an old one. For obvious reasons, second-time fathers are often older than their partners and are likely to be at a better stage in their careers to scale down their work commitment.

There is certainly a social revolution in fatherhood taking place, with 68% of us now regarding the traditional model of male breadwinner and female homemaker as outdated. And though most of them work, today's fathers spend an average of two hours a day on child-related activity, an eight-fold rise since the mid-1970s. Most telling of all, nearly 80% of working dads with young children say they would be happy to stay at home while their wives go out to work. Were it not for the scandalous gender wage gap, more couples would try it. There is also an argument for replacing (better) maternity and (still paltry) paternity rights with gender-neutral parental leave. Even the proposal to introduce a right for fathers to take up to 26 weeks of their partners' unused maternity leave from 2009 doesn't achieve that. Yet in countries such as Norway and Sweden, it is starting to make a real difference. An added advantage is that it should eventually rid the system of a disinclination to employ women of child-bearing age and aspirations.

There are around 200,000 "housedads" in Britain, according to the latest census. It's not known how many of them are older men. While the changing role of fathers seems to be a cause of general rejoicing, the issue of older parents is much more fraught. It's in the news again this week because new, more reliable egg-freezing techniques have opened the possibility of women one day having more choice in when they have children. Once again we're hearing the old argument about the "biologically optimal" child-bearing window of 20 to 35, that women who postpone childbearing to get on with their careers risk "missing the boat" and relying on any technological fix is unwise. Yesterday it was reported that more than one-quarter of Scottish couples in their late 30s have difficulty conceiving.

This is certainly a serious issue. Fertility in Scotland is down from an average 3.1 births per woman to 1.5. As it happens, it was work carried out under Prof Ashcroft at Fraser of Allander that showed that more than 40% of female graduates are still childless in their late 40s. The flip side is worryingly high rates of teenage pregnancy and early motherhood among the most disadvantaged. The demographic implications of these statistics should worry us. How can we create a smart, successful Scotland if the brightest aren't reproducing and the poorest and least educated are passing on their disadvantage to the next generation? The answers have to be substantial state support to break the cycle of poverty and more thinking about how to make Scotland an attractive place for families.

But it is wrong to harangue educated women for putting their careers before motherhood. I can't speak for Wendy Alexander, but many modern women don't establish stable relationships until their mid-30s, never mind financial independence. In the most recent survey of childless women, more than one-third cited failure to find a partner as the main reason.

As a second wife, who embarked on motherhood at 35 and finished at 42, I have to say that for me there wasn't a choice. My husband is four years older. At times it has been challenging, to say the least, not only because one has less energy at 3am but mainly because our babies arrived at the same time as our parents were slowly taking their leave, a common problem for we alma maters. It was summed up by an enervating expedition to a farm life centre: a restless babe in arms, two hyperactive horse-mad little girls, Grandpa (three strokes) in his wheelchair and Granny (Alzheimer's) wandering off every few minutes to talk to goats. After days like that, coming to work felt like a welcome break. Of course, the other issue is that we may not be around to meet our grandchildren. If my son has children at the same age I had him, I will be 85 and probably not much use for helping out with childcare. In fact, he is likely to face the same double whammy that we did.

Couples who embark on parenthood late need to know the downside. Apart from infertility problems, there are more risks of complications in pregnancy and of birth defects. On the plus side, children of older parents tend to be better off and better educated. We may not be wiser but at least I felt we had established values. Perhaps we were less selfish because we had already achieved a lot of our ambitions. I'm pretty sure I made a better mum at 40 than I would have been at 20. No reason, then, to apologise for our late arrivals.


© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Posted by: Leah on 11:46pm Wed 5 Sep 07
Not at all good for the offspring. Autism, schizophrenia, diabetes, Alzheimer's, prostate cancer all increase. A robust association between advancing paternal age and schizophrenia risk is reported, and genetic changes in the germ cells of older men are presumed to underlie the effect. If that is so, then the pathway may include effects on cognition, as those with premorbid schizophrenia are reported to have lower intelligence. There are also substantial genetic influences on intelligence, so de novo genetic events in male germ cells, which accompany advancing paternal age, may plausibly influence offspring intelligence. OBJECTIVE: An association of paternal age with IQ in healthy adolescents may illuminate the mechanisms that link it to schizophrenia. METHOD: We examined the association of paternal age and IQ scores using the Israeli Army Board data on 44 175 individuals from a richly described birth cohort, along with maternal age and other potential modifiers. RESULTS: A significant inverted U-shaped relationship was observed between paternal age and IQ scores, which was independent from a similar association of IQ scores with maternal age. These relationships were not significantly attenuated by controlling for multiple possible confounding factors, including the other parent's age, parental education, social class, sex and birth order, birth weight and birth complications. Overall, parental age accounted for approximately 2% of the total variance in IQ scores, with later paternal age lowering non-verbal IQ scores more than verbal IQ scores. CONCLUSION: We found independent effects of maternal and paternal age on offspring IQ scores. The paternal age effect may be explained by de novo mutations or abnormal methylation of paternally imprinted genes, whereas maternal age may affect fetal neurodevelopment through age-related alterations in the in-utero environment. The influence of late paternal age to modify non-verbal IQ may be related to the pathways that increase the risk for schizophrenia in the offspring of older fathers.
Posted by: Lindsey Harris, Poole, Dorset on 11:47am Thu 6 Sep 07
Leah's comment is right: potential problems to being an "older father" should be pointed out.

Normally it's older mothers that get all the bad press, so nice to see more of a balance for once! That said, anything to do with advancing age can bring problems, e.g. if you learn to ski late in life it's obviously not going to be as easy as if you'd started earlier. However, as with everything there are always exceptions to the rule.

Many older mothers will have perfectly healthy pregnancies and offspring and the same goes for older fathers. Even if you have children at a younger age it's not always plain sailing, there are always risks. Life, in general, is full of them and all you can do is try to get the balance right in order to minimise them.

If you are able to have children earlier then it's clearly best to do so, but remember that not everyone has that option.

Lindsey Harris, Mothers 35 Plus
(www.mothers35plus.c
o.uk)
Posted by: Brian D Finch, Brigadoon on 6:50pm Thu 6 Sep 07
My father was forty when I was born.
My grandfather was fifty when my father was born.
When he (my grandfather) was born,
Lee was in command of the Army of Northern Virginia
and Jackson was but lately dead.

I was six when I first met my grandfather.
He was ninety-six; too old for the Great War
(for which my father was too young).
I gather he fought in the Boer War.
Posted by: Myrmillo, Batavadorum on 10:55pm Thu 6 Sep 07
My great grandfather was in the Boer War, in the Argylls. He was captured at the battle of Magersfontein, where the Highland Brigade routed and/or surrendered. The Boers smashed his rifle, gave him a water canteen and some food, and pointed him in the direction of his own lines. We have never since had the privilege of being defeated by such nice people.
Posted by: michael a. mastel, jacksonville beach florida on 10:22am Fri 7 Dec 07
well, i am 40 years young and just found out by my 20 year old girlfriend(of 1.5 years), that i'm gona be a daddy!!! (again!!) wow...."not again", i thought.. O well, this time i'm gona do everything right, and make every second count!! With God's help, it will all work out for the good! praise be to the creator of ALL life! sincerly, DAD.
Add your comment
Please note: to publish your comment you must be registered on this site. If you are already registered, please enter your details below.
Email:
Password:




spacer
 IN YOUR AREA
 
Herald Appointments - Every Friday
Travel Shop
Airport Parking
Travel Insurance
Copyright © 2008 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights Reserved   
Sitemap :: Circulation :: Syndication :: Advertising :: About Us :: Terms of Use