Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Would Ireland follow Europe's Lead in Aborting the Huge Majority of Down Syndrome Pos

1…5681011…43

Comments

  • #212
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    So you do think an abortion at 20-27 weeks is fine?

    No, I don't. The vast majority wouldn't.
    Why do you keep addressing single points I make rather than the whole post?
    Is it because you have nothing to argue back with on the rest of what I'm saying?


  • #213
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    circadian wrote: »
    Oh! Look! Another strawman setup.
    The person thinks abortion at 27 weeks should be legal, nothing strawman about pointing that out.


  • #214
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    The person thinks abortion at 27 weeks should be legal, nothing strawman about pointing that out.

    Please quote where I said abortion at 27 weeks should be legal because I never ever said that. You literally just made that up.


  • #215
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    So you do think an abortion at 20-27 weeks is fine?

    No, I don't. The vast majority wouldn't.
    Why do you keep addressing single points I make rather than the whole post?
    Is it because you have nothing to argue back with on the rest of what I'm saying?
    You personally wouldn't but you think abortion should be legal regardless, so in essence in your world abortion at 27 weeks would be perfectly legal. You can disagree with something and think it should be legal which seems to be your position.


  • #216
    snowflaker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,922 ✭✭✭snowflaker


    Doltanian wrote: »
    I am against abortion and a Christian as is my Girlfriend, we both actually discussed the matter one evening when we were listening to the whole Abortion debate and agreed we would have an abortion if the baby was deformed or unlikely to live etc. We both are against abortion in Ireland and there is access to Abortion in the UK if required. The status quo should remain here.

    What I am against is the liberal marxists pushing for Abortion on demand and under no circumstances should a healthy baby ever be aborted, mental illness of the mother should not be a valid reason either. Its a very delicate situation and all pregnant women should be scanned so as to allow them to make informed decisions. There has been cases where a woman gave birth to a downs syndrome baby and totally disowned the child placing it into care.This type of situation should be avoided at all costs.

    But sure ye won't have to worry about that til yer married!

    Slave to the Rhythm (Method)


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    You personally wouldn't but you think abortion should be legal regardless, so in essence in your world abortion at 27 weeks would be perfectly legal. You can disagree with something and think it should be legal which seems to be your position.

    Now you are manipulating what I said in order to suit your own agenda.

    Can you please clarify why you feel you have a right to decide what another woman does with her body?
    Why you feel your own beliefs are so superior that EVERYONE should have to adhere to them?

    And please, don't reply with a 'think of the children' type reply.
    Because you've made it clear you don't give a sh*t what happens the child or the struggling parents after its born.


  • #218
    bucketybuck
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,938 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    You personally wouldn't but you think abortion should be legal regardless, so in essence in your world abortion at 27 weeks would be perfectly legal. You can disagree with something and think it should be legal which seems to be your position.

    What is your position on parents having to put the rest of their lives on hold to become full time carers for people with downs syndrome?

    Are their lives meaningless? Do their hopes and ambitions have no value? Why does the life of a potential child take precedent over theirs?

    Do you have any sympathy for them whatsoever? And do you have the balls to answer the question?


  • #219
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    A Little Pony wrote: »
    So you do think an abortion at 20-27 weeks is fine?

    I support abortion as early as possible and as late as necessary. Knowing that 0.2% of abortions take place after the 20th week of pregnancy I'm very comfortable knowing that abortions that do take place at or around week 27 are due to heart breaking circumstances such as ffa or immediate threat to the mothers life. At 27 weeks if a healthy woman requested termination of a healthy foetus what would happen is a termination of pregnancy and the foetus placed in care of the state until such a time the parent/s could look after it or adopted.


  • #220
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,387 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    Please quote where I said abortion at 27 weeks should be legal because I never ever said that. You literally just made that up.
    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    Now you are manipulating what I said in order to suit your own agenda.

    Can you please clarify why you feel you have a right to decide what another woman does with her body?
    Why you feel your own beliefs are so superior that EVERYONE should have to adhere to them?

    And please, don't reply with a 'think of the children' type reply.
    Because you've made it clear you don't give a sh*t what happens the child or the struggling parents after its born.

    Pony is the very same in all threads I've ever encountered them in. Completely clueless about the subject in which they are talking about so resort to making up nonsense like that to try to score points. Be careful what you say though because that little report button is the next line of defense.


  • #221
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,223 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »
    Us Irish have a long & proud history on how we accept & view people with down syndrome so could we be a special case & break the trend.

    What is this long and proud history you speak of?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • #222
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Wombatman wrote: »
    Have they developed a test for gingers yet?

    If wonder if they have developed a test for idiots yet?


  • #223
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    What is this long and proud history you speak of?

    We patronize them with the Special Olympics and give them underpaid jobs packing bags in supermarkets


  • #224
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,413 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    In all likelihood we will have some form of abortion available here. I don't see a distinction about making a choice to abort based on a DS test vs any other reason.


  • #225
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,223 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    harr wrote: »
    As a parent with a child with DS I still think it’s a woman’s choice what she wants to do...yes a lot of kids and adults with DS function very well but like our case a lot of kids with DS have more severe symptoms and not to mention the other health issues that come with DS.
    Normally charities and campaigners will always show examples of high functioning people with DS, rarely do we see the more severe cases...and expectant mothers really need to weigh up the facts before making that decision..both financially and emotionally not everyone is cut out to be a parent of a special needs child..

    You also never hear people who go on about children with DS or other disabilities arguing for increased investment in services for people with DS or ID. Having a child with DS or ID can be quite a difficult task - it can cause huge family stress and strain and often breakups as well quite often poverty for the family. Parents who end up as carers for their adult children can often have an extremely difficult life and they have to fight the state tooth and nail for support and services.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #226
    Neyite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,948 ✭✭✭✭Neyite


    Dynamic Generator wrote: »
    They should look after their child and receive every assistance to do so. That is the only logical and humane answer.

    Yeah Ireland don't do that either. In fact, Ireland is pretty sh!t at giving it's disabled citizens the resources they need to live as good a life as they can with their limitations. Our special needs resources are scant and useless and kids only get things like hearing aids, speech and language therapy and all that stuff after a long bloody waiting list.

    Then they have to reapply for the bloody medical card every year despite the child clearly having a condition that it's not possible to grow out of or cure.

    I'd love to see every pro-life advocate who calls abortion murder to give actual hands-on help to those that are disabled. Make it mandatory. You are that much of a pro-life preacher, get cracking helping insert feeding tubes, lugging around oxygen tanks, navigating broken paths and illegal drivers on footpaths with wheelchairs. Sit for three hours sorting out paperwork or travelling across the country to avail of yet another consultant appointment. Instead of wringing their hands uselessly and calling those parents "saints" Do some practical stuff.


  • #227
    A Little Pony
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,875 ✭✭✭A Little Pony


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    A Little Pony wrote: »
    You personally wouldn't but you think abortion should be legal regardless, so in essence in your world abortion at 27 weeks would be perfectly legal. You can disagree with something and think it should be legal which seems to be your position.

    Now you are manipulating what I said in order to suit your own agenda.

    Can you please clarify why you feel you have a right to decide what another woman does with her body?
    Why you feel your own beliefs are so superior that EVERYONE should have to adhere to them?

    And please, don't reply with a 'think of the children' type reply.
    Because you've made it clear you don't give a sh*t what happens the child or the struggling parents after its born.
    I'm not manipulating anything you said, the fact is a person can have an abortion at 27 weeks in your world because that is what you said by saying abortion should be legal and basically no questions asked.  I am picking you up on your position, you didn't clarify it by including any time limits. 

    So I didn't make anything up, it is in black and white, people can read it for themselves. At least be honest with your positions, if you believe abortion should be legal, that includes non time limits as your post indicates, then that is your position, I can't change that. 

    It also doesn't matter if it is a very small number of people who have abortions after 20 weeks, when you legalize abortion on demand, then anyone who is pregnant can have an abortion for whatever reason, it would be legal in law. What I think about that is irrelevant because the law would dictate they would be allowed to do that and as I follow the rule of law I would have to accept that.


  • #228
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,493 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    Can you please clarify why you feel you have a right to decide what another woman does with her body?

    we aren't deciding anything of the sort. a woman can have an abortion, by going to the uk.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #229
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,387 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    end of the road wrote: »
    we aren't deciding anything of the sort. a woman can have an abortion, by going to the uk.

    Apart from those that can't for financial or legal reasons.

    Apart from them.


  • #230
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,223 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    MrPudding wrote: »
    I don't want a child with DS. I have 4 children, and having a child with DS would have a serious impact on our ability to give those existing children the kind of start in life I want them to have.

    Even if I did not already have children, I would not want to have a child with DS. I don't believe in life at any cost or irrespective of the quality of that life. I would not want to bring a child with DS into the world, i would not want to because I would not intentionally bring a child into the world where I knew that child would suffer. Additionally, and quite selfishly, I would not want to suffer the impact it would have on my life.

    All that said, if someone else wants to bring a child with DS into the world then all power to them. I salute them. It is entirely their choice, and I support that. After all, I am pro-choice.

    MrP

    I get that. On the other hand your view that everything about a DS person is suffering is completely untrue.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #231
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    end of the road wrote: »
    we aren't deciding anything of the sort. a woman can have an abortion, by going to the uk.

    Except for those that can't. Probably the ones who need access to it most


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Dynamic Generator wrote: »
    Good. Anything that discourages abortion is to be welcomed.

    Yes. Because God forbid a person has a say in what happens to their body and in what course their life takes.


  • #233
    Electric Sheep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,111 ✭✭✭Electric Sheep


    Neyite wrote: »

    I'd love to see every pro-life advocate who calls abortion murder to give actual hands-on help to those that are disabled. Make it mandatory. You are that much of a pro-life preacher, get cracking helping insert feeding tubes, lugging around oxygen tanks, navigating broken paths and illegal drivers on footpaths with wheelchairs. Sit for three hours sorting out paperwork or travelling across the country to avail of yet another consultant appointment. Instead of wringing their hands uselessly and calling those parents "saints" Do some practical stuff.

    Not going to happen. The "child" is only important before it's born, pro-lifers don't care after it's born.


  • #234
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Dynamic Generator wrote: »
    Good. Anything that discourages abortion is to be welcomed.

    It probably won't discourage abortion. It will likely encourage those women to have unsafe abortions. Generally those who are unable to travel are the most vulnerable and they are usually the most desperate and the most likely to be exploited.


  • #235
    Ulysses Gaze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,570 ✭✭✭Ulysses Gaze


    Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »
    If Repeal and abortion on demand goes through.
    Is there then an obligation on the parents to abort a DS positive foetus.

    Surely it would be self indulgent of the parents to keep such a child who will always be a burden on the state and will never contribute to the states coffers.

    Dave-megadeth-34668987-182-232.gif


  • #236
    Sesame
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 522 ✭✭✭Sesame


    Haven't read all the replies but in response sent to the first post

    "I'm interested if firstly this test would be accepted in Ireland & if it were then what would our respective termination figure be."

    This test is called harmony (and there are others) and is already carried out in Ireland. You can pay around €300 and get the done at around 9 weeks gestation. It's just a blood test.

    Irish women are already using it though make decisions.
    This is technological advancement We can now find out during the first 3 months about any chromosomal issues. Why wouldn't we use this technology to both prepare for impending births or to decide to abort and start the conceiving process again without too much upset and lost time.

    Why would we not take advantage while this technology? Or should Ireland remain in the dark ages and leave it all as a "surprise".

    And no one would chose a child with a chromosomal disorder over a child without. If someone said you can choose one or the other, no one would chose to have a child who has health issues and developmental issues throughout their life over equality child who may not have these issues. I really don't see any moral or ethical dilemma with following Denmark and the UK and choosing to use the technology that exists. The chose after is the question, not the technology itself.

    And no we will never have those high levels of aborting foetuses that test positive for chromosomal issues due to the Catholic culture here. But women that are not Catholic or other wise should continue be able to use this technology for helping to make their own decisions. All these moral and ethical issues are so personal to each individual family it shouldn't be something a government or supposed moral guardian should be deciding for everyone else.


  • #237
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,387 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    Dynamic Generator wrote: »
    It's not just your life and body though, is it? If I get a girl pregnant should I be allowed shirk my duties as a father because it's an inconvenience? No.

    https://www.boards.ie/search/submit/?user=863148&sort=newest

    YAWN


  • #238
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    end of the road wrote: »
    we aren't deciding anything of the sort. a woman can have an abortion, by going to the uk.

    Ah so you are in favour of rights for those who have money and lack of rights for poor and vulnerable. This is all the anti abortion side is about. Control...


  • #239
    screamer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,193 ✭✭✭screamer


    Those tests already exist op.....so why the outrage I don't know. These tests can only give a likelihood of DS. The only test that can confirm it is amniosynthesis.
    As to abortion which is a whole different topic....I'm on the fence. What use is life with little or no quality to it? And that's for a much wider range of things than DS. Who knows what we'd decide if faced with such awful diagnoses. It's all grand to be high horsed with some perfect notion of life....but back in the real world there's **** hands dealt every day and tough heartbreaking decisions to be made.


  • #240
    The Legend Of Kira
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 726 ✭✭✭The Legend Of Kira


    BrokenArrows wrote: »
    Down Syndrome isnt some race of people to destroy. Its a condition which has huge implications on the child and the parents.

    What you describe is a test which allows parents to know if their child will be born with a condition that prevents them from living a normal life and also which prevents that child from maturing and being independent from the parents.

    I know that if i knew my child would be born with Downs then i would absolutely terminate. I couldn't imagine myself being a 70 year old aging father and still having to take care of my child.

    Downs isnt just a visual and mental condition. It comes with a host of other medical problems too.
    "" Down Syndrome isnt some race of people to destroy ""

    Replying to this quote from your post.  people with down syndrome are a minority group , given that they are a minority group what legal protections ( If any )  do you think they should have under the law before birth & after birth ?


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,387 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    "" Down Syndrome isnt some race of people to destroy ""

    Replying to this quote from your post.  people with down syndrome are a minority group , given that they are a minority group what legal protections ( If any )  do you think they should have under the law before birth & after birth ?

    The same as everyone else.


Advertisement