I'm curious how many moms and dads here were of an "advanced age" when they had their gifted child.

I don't recall exactly where I read it, but apparently, just like having "multiples", being older when conception occurs is more likely to produce a gifted child.

Can anyone help me with where I may have read this? It seems very odd to me; but so does the multiple birth situation.

What would you qualify as "advanced age"?

I was almost 26 and just turned 28 when dds were born but dh was 40 and 42. Does paternal advanced age count?

I don't recall exactly the age given. I do remember it was past 30 and possibly into the age of 35+.

Like I said, I'm trying to find where I read this. Google is no help.

I don't recall if the article made a distinction between the sexes or not.

I had my kids in my late 30s. I was busy being an attorney in my 20s. If I had had my kids in my 20s, I assume, based on family history, that they still would have been gifted. Could the correlation be partially due to some educated moms choosing to have careers and delaying child-bearing?

Well, then I guess I would qualify - I was 33 and 38 when my DDs were born and DH was 38 and 43.
My brother and his wife were in their late 20s when they had their girls and both of the kids are gifted.

Searching and found this: Dad's Age May Lower Junior's I.Q.

Not the article I recall...

LOL - I was 3 weeks shy of 40 when I had ds8, and dh was 47 at the time

I know I qualify .. lol
I was 39 when dd8 was born (not yet identified) and 41 when ds6 was born (ID as HG)
edited to add dh was 32 when dd was born and 34 when ds was born

I found this excerpt from the book "Exceptionally Gifted Children" by Miraca U.M. Gross:

Age of Parents at Birth of Subject Child (Ch 5, p 78)

The literature on intellectual giftedness suggests strongly that the gifted tend to be children of older parents. In Terman's sample (Terman, 1925), the mean age of fathers at the birth of the subject child was 33.6 years, with a median of 32.6 years. The mean age of the mothers at the children's birth was 29 years with a median of 28.5 years. In the mid-1980s, Rogers (1986) reported that the mean age of mothers of children of average intellectual ability was 25.4 years. By contrast, in Silverman and Kearney's Colorado sample of children of IQ 170+ (Silverman and Kearney, 1989) the mean age of mothers at the time of the child's birth was 29.6 years, while VanTassel-Baska (1983) reported that in her sample of highly gifted finalists in the 1982 Midwest Talent Search, the majority of subjects were born when their fathers were in their early thirties and their mothers in their late twenties.

The author mentions these as the "American studies" and goes on to describe a later Australian study with similar results.

I sent you a PM with a link (it's very long) to the excerpt.

My husband and I were both of "advanced age" when our son was born. I was 30, he had just turned 39.

Educated people, who tend to be smarter, tend to have kids when they're older.

(I'm not sure if there's an implication there that being older raises the IQ of your offspring or has a positive influence on it).

I was 31, DH 38 so we were of 'advanced age'

DH and I qualify. As others have said, I would look carefully for a tendency for HG+ adults to have their children late, before I looked for an effect of being born to older parents on the children.

Hi Ametrine ~ When we had our first, my husband and I were both over 30

I was 23 with my first, 25 with my second and 32 with my third - all were gifted. Not exactly advanced in age.

I was 36 and 38 for our kids; hubby is two years older. My mom was 34 with me, which at the time was older. We qualify there!

30 is "advanced age"?

I feel old

I was 39 (5 weeks from turning 40!) and hubby was 42. We were too busy before that age to even think about raising a family. But hindsight being 20/20, we wished we had started earlier so we could have had one or two more.

Same with me. Nowadays, 34 isn�t old at all (IMO).

I was going to bring this up if nobody had. It's a correlation/causation problem. If simply being older led to smarter kids, you should be able to see a pattern of increased IQ among biological siblings.

When DD was born, I was 30, DW was 25. That would be advanced parenting age historically, but not by modern standards.

My mom and dad were both 22 when I was born.

This is a great example of Correlation does not imply causation


anyway it's quite possible that there are third factors involved -
for example, the movie 'Idiocracy' shows a split screen of two families making reproductive decisions - the 'highly intelligent' family displaying all the perfectionism and worry that we see everyday on this board, but in a humorous light. An attempt was made to exaggerate, but I saw a lot of myself.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXRjmyJFzrU


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy

Not my favorite movie ever, but 'interesting' - I particularly liked how every time that 'normal' character spoke, all the 'future' people made fun of him for his affected speech. A good reminder of how irritating that can be for our kids (speaking of kids, this movie isn't for most of them!)

I remember a popular tee shirt when I was in college of a comic book close up of a female with a thought bubble, 'Opps, I forgot to have children.' I think gifted females are more comfortable to challenge gender roles, at least long enough to delay childbearing. I found spending time with my son more interesting than my work life, but I noticed that my local neighbor-moms found the early years of mothering tedious, or complained of that anyway.

I would guess that older, more experienced parents would be more likely to go through the identification process (which is different from actually having more gifted children) if they have used their advanced age to get more earning power and time off power to go through the identification process. I'd love to see ages of gifted parents in states that don't do gifted testing in the school vs. states that test everyone.

I also suspect that only children gifted children are more likely to get identified, not because they are smarter, but becuase they probably act out more for a few reasons.
1) they don't have the relief of a whole passle of sibs to be their home gifted cluster
2) they don't have the 'home socialization training' of sibs
3) It's easier for a parent to give 'full attention' to an only, but it isn't easier for a teacher at school to follow suit, so it's more of a contrast.

Older parents are more likely to grind to a halt after only one child, physically and emotionally. I was 35,DH 42. One kid was enough to wear us out.

As a 'likely 2E' older mom, I think it took me longer to feel 'grown up enough' to make important life decisions - such as choosing a DH and becoming a parent. Could be my perfectionism for sure. Plus the world was always throwing me curve balls because I didn't know myself as a gifted person, and kept measuring myself against the standards of the people around me and making mistakes that I mercilessly took myself to task over.

Not my most coherant post, but an interesting topic.
Love and More Love,
Grinity

I was 25 with first dd9 and 28 with dd6. Dd9 was identified this year in public school as a matter of policy. Dd6 has not been identified. We don't have the money to test and are still trying to make a life for ourselves as we didn't have support growing up. I think that grinity has a very good point that more children go unidentified with parent who had children at a younger age for many reasons.

You've taken this conversation in an interesting direction, because with the causation/correlation problem, I think it would be more instructive for people to share their stories about WHY they had children at the age they did.

In my case, I came from a poor family, and after a year of failing to put myself through college, I did a 6-year stint in the Navy. I quickly decided that the military life was completely unsuited to family life, and I refused to entertain the idea of a permanent family attachment during my enlistment, which was never going to go beyond the required 6 years. I met DW just about a year after my enlistment ended. We started out as friends for about half a year, lived together for about a year and a half, got married, and then conceived DD on purpose nearly two years after marriage.

So we basically knew each other for four years before bearing DD. And that timeline was under some pretty severe pressure... DW had endometriosis, and every doctor told us that one of the best treatments for that was pregnancy. But even though both of us felt strongly about having children, neither one of us was comfortable with the idea of having one before the time was right.

This allowed the condition to progress to the point where DW needed to have a hysterectomy following DD's birth, so it did limit us to the one child. But we otherwise refused to allow the condition to dictate our timeline. And looking back, it seems like it was the right decision. I think we needed that time together to build up our bond, so it could survive the period where DD consumed so much of our lives and left us very little for ourselves, nevermind each other.

Yeah... there are definitely some strains of perfectionism in that story.

Because my wife wanted to have a child when she was 24 and I just happened to be 28 at the time.

I had our first when I was 28 (DH 33) and second when I was 31 (DH 36).

I do wish I have them even later. I spent most of my 20s studying, and I want to spend my 30s on my career. It's challenging to juggle a demanding career with 2 small children. I am sure it would be all worth it in my 40s and beyond.

Had to laugh a little about what advanced age is thought to be
I have 3 girls #1 I had at 20 #2 at 38 dh was 55 and #3 at 40 dh was 57 DH (has another dd he was 39) the two younger ones are DYS.... also I believe dh's older dd is also at least hg she's never been tested

don't know if it matters but they were all naturally conceived

on the question of why I had my 2 younger children later...after my divorce with my oldest dd I just wanted to spend time with her and work on my career I remarried at 36 decided to have more children about a year later

A University of Queensland, Australia study suggests that becoming a father at age 40 or older is linked to baby at a higher risk of schizopherenia, autism and syndromes that cause facial and skull abnormalities. They also found that those born to older dads scored more poorly on a range of intelligence tests that looked at concentration, memory, reasoning and reading skills.
supporting link--------
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16719-older-men-may-have-less-intelligent-kids.html

older moms have higher risk of having trisomies like down syndrome etc

the thread is interesting, but we are missing denominator (large population ouside this forum)

I had my daughter when I was 22. I was a single parent from the time she was three until she turned 12. I know she was bright because she could read at age 4 but I didn't know anything about gifted kids. As soon as she was reading on her own I stopped reading to her. I was too busy trying to earn a living and attend college at night. Her teachers would tell me that she was very bright but then she went to middle school, became a cheerleader, and academics were not important to her. Her grades went way down, she didn't seem to care, and I couldn't understand why she was like that. I had been able to make good grades while working full time, including some overtime, and going to college at night. She was only interested in socializing and having fun.

My daughter would fight with my husband who was retired military. He couldn't understand why she wouldn't follow the rules and make good grades. He has a son from his first marriage who tested highly gifted but didn't care about making good grades and staying in school. Having another child at that point didn't seem like a good idea, but I secretly still wanted another child and got pregnant in my late 30's. My husband is almost nine years older than I am.

While I was pregnant with my son at an advanced age I had no health problems except for the migraines. My son kicked a lot and his kicks were strong, but he had a difficult birth. After he was born his muscles seemed weaker than normal, but he could identify some letters when he was one. When he started reading without being taught and identifying words that were spelled out for him at 2 1/2 he seemed more academically gifted than my daughter did at that age. He had physical delays because of the mild muscle weakness and low physical endurance but he was cognitively advanced. He spent more time more time reading and learning because of the physical issues. He had some sensory processing issues (vestibular and proprioceptive) and at age 11 developed scoliosis and migraines. None of the doctors my son saw ever said anything about our advanced ages causing either the giftedness or the disabilities.

My grandmother did a similar trick by having my uncle and my mother 20 years apart.

I have absolutely no idea why she did it although she used the same husband both times.

I'm not really sure why people have children at any age. I always believed that once you are married and as long as you are willing to love, children are gifts and I was never taught family planning or anything like that. I am actually amazed that so many people actually chose when and how far apart to have children. I have two. That is how Many I have been gifted. I might be given another before I decide I am physically not fit to make a healthy baby. I'm not religeous. I just wanted to throw another way of life out there.

#1 at 37
#2 at 39 (less than a month shy of 40)

Would take more too.

Both DDs were born when DH & I were in our 20s, and both have been identified as gifted. DD#1 was born when I was in grad school, and while I probably wouldn't do that again (prelims & morning sickness were a bad combination), I'm glad we had them early.

I had my son (DYS) at 24...so can't say advanced age had anything to do with his gifted levels. I had our twins at 27 and they are bright as well (age 5), but haven't been tested as we finally saved to afford for our oldest to test this past summer.

My DH is exceptionally bright and his mother and father were 17 when he was born...

I agree with several posters who said that its likely more children whose parents are in the advanced ages are identified as gifted because they tend to be more educated, with better paying jobs, leading to be able to afford testing and search out more than those with less education.

Hubby and I got married young. I was just 18 and he was 20. We decided not to have any children and just spent time traveling and working.

When my grandma died when I was 34, I realized (late, I know) that one day I would be the "old lady" with no husband (statistically), and no children. My grandma relied heavily on my mom to watch out for her best interest, and I had an epiphany that to be childless could be a bad idea. I know this sounds entirely selfish, but it's the truth of why my husband and I began to try to conceive at 35 and 37 years respectively.

Our son was born five months past my 40th birthday. I didn't want to risk having another that may have health problems, so we went the surgical route for contraception.

I'm 45 and DH is 47 today. We have a son that I wouldn't trade for anything and many days I'm sorry I was so selfish and didn't have more.

Thanks everyone for weighing in on this topic. It struck me as being one similar to the whole "nature/nuture" thing.

I'll remember this the next time I hear my children discuss what they are going to do with my money after I'm dead.

Kids. They can be so darn cute!

Dd13 was born 4 months before I started grad school and dd11 my last semester. I agree that I wouldn't have necessarily planned it that way (especially b/c dh worked in a different state from where dds and I lived during school), but I wouldn't change it either.

I generally think that the age at which I had dd13 was ideal b/c, had I been any younger I wouldn't have had the patience to deal with her constant screaming and, had I been any older I never would have survived two years of no sleep since she slept in 30 minute intervals for the first two years and didn't sleep through the night until a bit after two.

My DS8 was born when I was 35 and in my 2nd year of law school. DH was 28. We made a decision to try at that time because I did not want to start trying to have babies at 37 after I got out of law school and started a new career. It was good timing because I never felt like having another.

And kids with higher IQs are less likely to have mothers who are single parents. Again, causation or correlation? Does being raised by a single parent lower your IQ OR are mothers with higher IQs (thinking nature instead of nurture)more likely to wait until they are in a stable relationship to become pregnant. And on that thought, tying in with the first part on education, more likely to wait until they are finished with their education and established in a career before beginning a family.

In any event, DD was born when I was 26.. about 1.5 years after graduating from my second BSc and 1 year after getting married. DS was born when I was 32.. 1 year after I started my Masters. If he ends up being GT, I will squarely chalk that up to the fact that he started Masters level classes at the young age of 13 days old. :-)

lol. Maybe I can chalk dd11's giftedness up to the same. The only day (night, actually since my classes were at night) that I missed of grad school was the day she was born. She came to class with me starting when she was about 4 days old. Fortunately, she was a much quieter baby than her sister! I could nurse with her cradled in one arm and write with the other.

I grew up poor, and nobody ever identified me as gifted, but that doesn't change who I was.

My DD was identified immediately by the school as someone who required screening for gifted services, with no intervention by DW or myself. So money didn't matter there, either.

In my more sardonic moments I refer to DD as "Daddy's little retirement plan."

I thought the reason that you "might" see more gifted children from older parents, esp. women who are older, is b/c you might have more time and patience when you are older, as compared to when you are young.
Some parents who are in their 30's or 40's and having kids may have more disposable income to lavish on the child as compared to if they are having a child at age 20. They may be more settled with their careers and ready to be involved with raising a child.
Obviously, you can be a young parent and have a gifted child!

I agree with Dude. The testing isn't what makes you gifted (and the OP didn't refer to testing), and public schools commonly test for IQ these days anyway. My kids have never been tested, but it's obvious (grade skips, etc.) that they're gifted.

What I was saying was that smarter, educated people TEND to have kids later, and that their kids tend to be smarter. This is not an absolute rule, obviously, but the trend has been increasing over the last 20-25 years or so as professional options for women have increased and as women's health has improved. When I was a kid, the doctors used to talk about having a baby past 30 as being "advanced maternal age" or AMA. Now AMA is defined as over 35 (well, around here at least).

A bit of Googling shows that the average age of first time mothers is increasing (here�s an example with references to published studies).

Plus, as women get older, the chances for chromosomal abnormalities in the child increase. These include Down syndrome and trisomy 18.

IMO (with some research studies to back it up), mom and/or dad's genes have a large influence on Junior's IQ.

Plus, it's relatively easy to take IQ points away from a person, but very hard to add them in and keep them there. And the potential increases are nowhere near as dramatic as the potential losses. This has been shown by many research studies, some of which debunked studies showing vast gains in IQ (AT MOST, these gains were short-lived). Long-lasting (smallish) increases in IQ are associated with adoption at or near birth into favorable circumstances out of unfavorable ones. As far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong), this is the only way to achieve long-lasting upward changes in IQ.

Perhaps this will change as our understanding of neuroscience becomes more sophisticated.

Although your chances of chromosomal abnormalities increase as the maternal age increases, like Downs, it's still acceptably low.
For a woman age 35, chance of a Downs child is 0.3%. Age 40, 1%. Age 45 and older, 4%. So if you are 45, you still have a 96% chance of NOT having a Downs child. Most children with Downs syndrome are born to younger mothers, simply b/c more younger mothers have children than older mothers.

One other long-lasting trainable is the working memory, right? If you keep working on it. Also there was something about higher math and the possibility it created higher reasoning abilities. I don't remember, lol.

I'd lean towards older parents being more proactive as to the reason behind the statistics. I had my two older kids in my twenties and my last in my thirties. In my twenties, the teacher and principal were still "authority figures" to me, and I often accepted their decisions because they were in authority. As a mom in my in my forties now, I am very clear when I am in a meeting that I am the mom, and that makes my decision the one that bears the most importance - not the teacher's or principal's. Not that I don't respect their point of view or expertise, but I'm not intimidated the way I was as a young mom. Had I been a young mom with my last kid, I doubt he'd be identified as 2e. I wouldn't take no for an answer and didn't accept the head-patting this time, and I pushed for testing until the school finally acquiesced - in part, I'm sure, to make me go away.

So from my own myopic personal experience, I know my son's identification is completely related to my own age.

Yes, but...the OP was about giftedness itself, not its identification or the effects of age on advocacy.

My guess would be it is correlation between giftedness (has a large genetic component, gifted adults tend to be more educated, educated parents, especially women, tend to breed later) and "advanced" parental age.

My other guess would be that correcting for education level of parents you would see slightly more gifted kids with *younger* parents, and also less special needs/2E kids.

But my belief in the higher quality of younger eggs/sperm didn't lead me to reproduce earlier (we married at 23/24 after finishing graduate studies but before starting our careers, kids born at 30/32, 33/34 and 35/36). Of course as of now none of my kids have tested as gifted either. As for myself, I was born when my parents were 26/36, am the eldest of five and was the only one id'd as gifted.

Lots of unidentified gifted out there. You can't count it if you can't see it.

Plus, by the fifth page of comments, the original thread often meanders and sometimes engages in senseless violence.