Monday, April 27, 2009

Autism Substantially More Likely With Breech Babies and Older Moms

A new study from the University of Utah School of Medicine in Salt Lake City, and published in Pediatrics, helps confirm earlier findings that babies born in the breech position or to older mothers are substantially more likely to develop an autism spectrum disorder. As reported on Independent.ie :


Psychiatrists from the University of Utah School of Medicine in Salt Lake City compared medical records for 132 children with autism with those of 13,200 children without the disorder who were also born in 1994. They found that autism was twice as common in babies who weren’t born head-first and 68 percent more common in those born to mothers older than age 34.


When studies such as this are publicized it is hard not to look at your own autistic child's delivery. His mom was not over 34 at the time but Conor was a breech baby, delivered by cesarean section.




Bookmark and Share

6 comments:

Foresam said...

No woman over age 34 ever birthed an autistic baby before 1931. No breech babies were ever autistic before 1931.

Stephanie Lynn Keil said...

I don't think I was a breech baby, but my brother was, and he is the opposite of autism. My mother also had a C-Section with all 3 of her kids and was under 30. I was a blue baby though, for whatever reason.

Navywifeandmom said...

My daughter with ASD was not breech. She was headfirst and born at home with a midwife and no labor interventions.

And I was 24 at the time of her birth.

A Family said...

WOW! So interesting to hear! My son with autism was breech!

Anonymous said...

Yeah and I think it's funny how woman, know now that drinking and smoking aren't good and now there's prenatal vitamins. I know autism has anything to do what happened while the mother was pregnant, if that's so, why is there more autism cases all the time. People know what's going on, it's proven over and over, how more obvious could it be. It's all a big cover up, I don't know how they can sleep at night, it's amazing to me how heartless some people can be.

Anonymous said...

As for the 1931 comment, how can you be sure? Did they know autism existed in 1931? I'm pretty sure that persons with autism were either labeled "retarded" if they were severe or simply odd if they had Asperger's or something similar. Improved diagnostic techniques have turned the "odd kid down the road" into an autistic spectral disorder. In other words, we have put a different label and lumped them into a category. I think the breech positioning of a fetus is probably a stretch. This seems most likely a genetic condition, based on evidence that families who have one autistic child are more likely to have another. Also, an Israeli study linked older fathers to autistic children a couple of years ago, so it seems the real news out of this most recent study would be the last tag: Older moms. Though I didn't read what they've classified "older moms" as (the Israeli study classified older fathers as over 45). This would further substantiate evidence that autism is linked to genes or damaged chromosomes and would explain why autism rates are on the rise, if such a thing is really happening. After all, the average age of mothers and fathers in industrialized nations is going up.