Midwife form question that wasn't intended to be hard to answer:

BostonGayGal

"Age of father: _________"

Well, let's see, I don't have his birthday but he was born in 1979, so five years after me, but the incomplete set of vials I have left were of samples taken in 2006 and 2007. But do I then add any time for the years they have been freezing or does that process stop sperm time completely?

Ahhhh, me and my first world problems. 

Lyssapee

Hmm, I guess you could put NA.  Maybe you could put 30ish.

OR you could just write 1979? 

 

heather_09_15_07

I'd just put unknown.

HappyAardvark

I would put "N/A."

Maybe it will spark a realization on behalf of whoever put that form together that their question may need to be reworded, or is not really medically relevant.

Lambie.

They have actually linked some chromosomal abnormalities to advanced age in the dad, and I guess that is why they ask. He isn't that old so I wouldn't worry about it. I am going to guess you have more of a clue than some people.

roshybride

Lambie.:

They have actually linked some chromosomal abnormalities to advanced age in the dad, and I guess that is why they ask. He isn't that old so I wouldn't worry about it. I am going to guess you have more of a clue than some people.

This. There is newer evidence that shows that advanced age of the father can contribute to an increased incidence of genetic disorders, such as downs syndrome.  So even with a younger mother, some health care providers will recommend the additional genetic testing that they would offer a mother with advanced maternal age. 

UK2ME

kdodge423:

HappyAardvark:

Maybe it will spark a realization on behalf of whoever put that form together that their question may need to be reworded, or is not really medically relevant.

Why? Biologically every child has a father unless they are a clone.

And even then, one might argue that the "father" is the man whose DNA contributed to the original person of whom the clone was made. 

That being said, I take BGG's original point, and agree that 1979 is more than a certain percentage of mothers-to-be are able to provide.  I think I'd go with 32 and err on the side of caution.