The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: The second child always healthier than the first?  (Read 1772 times)

Offline ConfusedHermit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Iíve heard that the second (and so on) child a mother has is always going to be healthier than the first. Is this true?

My guess about this is itís because the first time was also the first time the motherís body was providing for a fetus, and the second time (like many things in life) was when she was more experienced.


 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: The second child always healthier than the first?
« Reply #1 on: 23/08/2012 04:56:56 »
Anytime you say "Always", there are many exceptions. 

For example, Rh incompatibility disease only occurs in the second, or later pregnancies due to the mother essentially making antibodies against the baby's blood.

For a young mother...  18?  It is quite possible that a little later pregnancy would be easier on the mother, and on the baby.
However, for an older mother...  40?  the older the mother, the greater the risk of chromosome related birth defects, such as Down's syndrome.

One can always say that the first child was the "practice child", and one will get things right by the second one.  But, there are still some benefits to the first child, although Birth Order effects are apparently highly disputed.
 

Offline Lmnre

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
Re: The second child always healthier than the first?
« Reply #2 on: 23/08/2012 18:12:56 »
By default, the oldest child tends to be the first in the family to experience something (such as ride a bike, swing on a swing, etc) because they have no older sibling whom they could have watched and learned from, so they take the brunt of inexperience.
 

Offline ConfusedHermit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: The second child always healthier than the first?
« Reply #3 on: 24/08/2012 07:22:27 »
So, the better question is:

'Is the second child mostly healthier than the first? '

On average? :{o~
 

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
Re: The second child always healthier than the first?
« Reply #4 on: 24/08/2012 07:58:56 »
So, the better question is:

'Is the second child mostly healthier than the first? '

On average? :{o~

Yes.


Unless is isn't.

:)
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8124
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: The second child always healthier than the first?
« Reply #5 on: 24/08/2012 08:22:24 »
... for an older mother...  40?  the older the mother, the greater the risk of chromosome related birth defects, such as Down's syndrome.

Old fathers increase the risk too ... 

Quote
Older fathers over 40 had twice the rate of Down syndrome births compared with men 24 years old and younger when they had children with women over 35.
http://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-reproduction/news/20030701/dad-age-down-syndrome

i.e. the odds are not so bad if mommy is a cougar.
« Last Edit: 24/08/2012 08:27:33 by RD »
 

Offline ConfusedHermit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: The second child always healthier than the first?
« Reply #6 on: 24/08/2012 18:34:35 »
I figured that was the case.

Thank you for the help, everyone :]
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: The second child always healthier than the first?
« Reply #6 on: 24/08/2012 18:34:35 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums