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 you abort a child with Down Syndrome?

  • 30-08-2011 08:22PM
    #1
    mydearwatson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 88 ✭✭


    I'm very much open to correction on this, but I've heard that if scans show up the possibility of Down Syndrome in an unborn child, the parent has the option to abort.

    Is this true?

    And would you do it? As far as I know, the scan shows up your chances of having a DS child in terms of percentages. Would you continue with the pregnancy if there was a 1% chance? 5%? 50%? 99%?

    Assume that the legalities and the stage of pregnancy is irrelevant (i.e. assume that you could legally and easily abort up to birth.)

    Personally ... I couldn't ever imagine myself making the decision to abort but I could absolutely understand and respect the decisions of others.


«13456

Comments

  • #2
    Moon Indigo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 285 ✭✭Moon Indigo


    If I am totally honest me and my partner have discussed this. At first I said I probably would go ahead with the birth and my partner said she wouldn't. This is not because of any lack of love for the child just something we have discussed. I think that could all change if we saw the child on screen.

    It terrible to say but I truly think it depends on how severe the DS is/was and of course in reality if we seen the baby on screen maybe it would change our perspectives.
    The thing is that we would not be around all the time in the childs future to protect it. I know things have improved considerably in recent times with regard to peoples attitudes etc. At the end of the day we have a high enough chance of out living the child and then what? I hate the though of he/she being in a home of looked after by someone who dosen't care. The quality of life in the future is what worries us.
    I hope we never have to make the choice.


  • #3
    alex73
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭alex73


    Yes Downs Children are sub humans.... Just kill them, they end up costing the state millions.. Who would be bothered raising them anyway.

    Thats the great thing about abortion, it allows humanity to weed out the non desirables, esp down syndrome babies.


  • #4
    alex73
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭alex73


    See my thread on this topic..http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056324984

    By the way I have highest respect for anyone with the condition. They are amazing, loving and careing.


  • #5
    Moon Indigo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 285 ✭✭Moon Indigo


    Bit strong there Alex73. I hope you didn't read my post and think I was saying that because that was not the point. I personally have nothing against DS or those who are DS or any other disability. The world takes and needs all types to make it go around.


  • #6
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    No. I wouldn't... and no I don't respect the decision of those who would. One of those issues that crops up occassionally that really makes me sick.

    Put it this way. We are hugely proud of our link to the Special Olympics and the team in Ireland, and the fantastic work that the athletes, trainers, carers, chaperones, families etc do.

    What right would any of us have to hold it in such esteem if you put certain conditions, such as Down's, on a list of grounds reasonable for abortion. What message does it send to adults with Down's Syndrome amongst others? That others like them are unworthy of life or protection?

    What happens, as has happened in other jurisdictions, when advising (and indeed putting pressure on parents to abort) aborting unborn with certain conditions becomes then norm? Does society's attitude to those living with Down's for example improve? Would our society be a better place to be for any of us when the 'disabled' start to disappear? When the love of parents and when the skill and care of teams of surgeons separating conjoined twins for example becomes less and less frequent... because they've been aborted instead?


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    alex73 wrote: »
    Yes Downs Children are sub humans.... Just kill them, they end up costing the state millions.. Who would be bothered raising them anyway.

    Thats the great thing about abortion, it allows humanity to weed out the non desirables, esp down syndrome babies.

    :rolleyes:


  • #8
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    prinz wrote: »
    What right would any of us have to hold it in such esteem if you put certain conditions, such as Down's, on a list of grounds reasonable for abortion. What message does it send to adults with Down's Syndrome amongst others?

    That Down's is a cruel imposition on a sentient being and those that have to look after them? Nature is cruel?


  • #9
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    That Down's is a cruel imposition on a sentient being and those that have to look after them? Nature is cruel?

    ..and who or what decides what exactly constitutes a 'cruel imposition'?

    How many family members/friends/carers of people with Down's feel it a cruel imposition? Who gives you the right to make people with Down's feel like a burden on their loved ones?

    The nature is cruel argument has been around a long time. It's no more relevant or moral today than it was decades or centuries or millenia ago when it was used as an excuse to wipe out anybody considered inferior.


  • #10
    CathyMoran
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,458 ✭✭✭CathyMoran


    Had the nuchal scan (an ultrasound and blood test) on both of ours and they were OK - we did agree ahead that we would keep our child no matter what though. I would not even get an amneocentisis test.


  • #11
    Rabidlamb
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,202 ✭✭✭Rabidlamb


    It's a tough one & I'm don't think anyone knows for sure until there in that situation.
    I reckon a lot of parents must be having abortions cause there seems to be far fewer DS kids around now than say 20 years ago.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    CathyMoran wrote: »
    I would not even get an amneocentisis test.

    Why not?


  • #13
    scholar007
    Closed Accounts Posts: 902 ✭✭✭scholar007


    alex73 wrote: »
    Yes Downs Children are sub humans.... Just kill them, they end up costing the state millions.. Who would be bothered raising them anyway.

    Thats the great thing about abortion, it allows humanity to weed out the non desirables, esp down syndrome babies.

    OMG! :eek: - You don't recall if you wore a grey uniform in a previous life by any chance?


  • #14
    CathyMoran
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,458 ✭✭✭CathyMoran


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    Why not?
    There is a risk of miscarriage and I know how painful that is.


  • #15
    spicykat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14 ✭spicykat


    Thats weird but my midwife told me that they cant tell you whether you have a DS baby or not from early scans....and on late ones it will be too late to abort the baby... I know you can do some tests-they take the sample of blood or smth at i think 14 weeks, but thats about it, and plus they will not tell you with 100% accuracy


  • #16
    Tidyweb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 402 ✭✭Tidyweb


    Think I might start a thread "Would you abort a baby if you found out they would grow up and start a thread like this"


  • #17
    Blisterman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,487 ✭✭✭Blisterman


    prinz wrote: »
    No. I wouldn't... and no I don't respect the decision of those who would. One of those issues that crops up occassionally that really makes me sick.

    Put it this way. We are hugely proud of our link to the Special Olympics and the team in Ireland, and the fantastic work that the athletes, trainers, carers, chaperones, families etc do.

    What right would any of us have to hold it in such esteem if you put certain conditions, such as Down's, on a list of grounds reasonable for abortion. What message does it send to adults with Down's Syndrome amongst others? That others like them are unworthy of life or protection?

    What happens, as has happened in other jurisdictions, when advising (and indeed putting pressure on parents to abort) aborting unborn with certain conditions becomes then norm? Does society's attitude to those living with Down's for example improve? Would our society be a better place to be for any of us when the 'disabled' start to disappear? When the love of parents and when the skill and care of teams of surgeons separating conjoined twins for example becomes less and less frequent... because they've been aborted instead?

    That's a bit harsh I think. Obviously if any parent had the choice of having a child with or without Down Syndrome, the vast majority would choose without. That's not an insult to anyone with Down syndrome or the great work that people do in the area, just an aknowledgment that it's very difficult, both for the child with down syndrome and the parents.

    I think a lot of it comes down to your views on abortion. Personally, I don't consider an early fetus to be a human. They lack consciousness, so I'd be inclined to "try again" so to say, but that's just me.


  • #18
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Blisterman wrote: »
    That's a bit harsh I think. Obviously if any parent had the choice of having a child with or without Down Syndrome, the vast majority would choose without. That's not an insult to anyone with Down syndrome or the great work that people do in the area, just an aknowledgment that it's very difficult, both for the child with down syndrome and the parents..

    Hypothetically wanting a child without is a far cry from deliberating destroying those with. Personally I would very much see it as an insult to those living with DS if our state for example decided that an unborn child with DS was less worthy of life than an unborn child without it. The real crime comes when the option of a termination becomes the preferred and advised option.

    While I respect your position regarding early abortions, in the area of discussing disabled or unborn with Down's syndrome, late term abortion features more often when the presense of conditions can more easily be ascertained. In the UK for example abortions can be carried out up to full term in the case of serious disabilities...although exactly what this entails is up in the air it seems.


  • #19
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    prinz wrote: »
    Hypothetically wanting a child without is a far cry from deliberating destroying those with. Personally I would very much see it as an insult to those living with DS if our state for example decided that an unborn child with DS was less worthy of life than an unborn child without it. The real crime comes when the option of a termination becomes the preferred and advised option.

    While I respect your position regarding early abortions, in the area of discussing disabled or unborn with Down's syndrome, late term abortion features more often when the presense of conditions can more easily be ascertained. In the UK for example abortions can be carried out up to full term in the case of serious disabilities...although exactly what this entails is up in the air it seems.

    What gives you the right/knowledge to deem it a crime?


  • #20
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    What gives you the right/knowledge to deem it a crime?

    A sense of morality which tells me that people should not be pushed into aborting their unborn child because it is disabled. That any society should deem certain members unworthy/less worthy of life is a crime in my book. Unborn or not is irrelevant. I don't see the difference between shipping disabled kids off to be 'put down' and adopting a list of ailments for which the preferred solution is abortion.


  • #21
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    prinz wrote: »
    A sense of morality which tells me that people should not be pushed into aborting their unborn child because it is disabled. That any society should deem certain members unworthy/less worthy of life is a crime in my book. Unborn or not is irrelevant.

    Who's being pushed?
    prinz wrote: »
    I don't see the difference between shipping disabled kids off to be 'put down' and adopting a list of ailments for which the preferred solution is abortion.

    That's painfully obvious.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    The question really is, is abortion ever appropriate. If you say no, then do you think its feasible to provide limitless resources to care for the outcome of that stance. Considering it will the parents, and siblings, their entire life, and resources beyond that.


  • #23
    Blisterman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,487 ✭✭✭Blisterman


    prinz wrote: »
    Hypothetically wanting a child without is a far cry from deliberating destroying those with. Personally I would very much see it as an insult to those living with DS if our state for example decided that an unborn child with DS was less worthy of life than an unborn child without it. The real crime comes when the option of a termination becomes the preferred and advised option.

    While I respect your position regarding early abortions, in the area of discussing disabled or unborn with Down's syndrome, late term abortion features more often when the presense of conditions can more easily be ascertained. In the UK for example abortions can be carried out up to full term in the case of serious disabilities...although exactly what this entails is up in the air it seems.

    Obviously I belive it's the parent's choice and there's alone, and it would be wrong for the government or anyone else to push people into doing so.

    Late term abortions are a much trickier area, but with testing becoming more accurate at an early stage, hopefully this can be avoided.


  • #24
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    Who's being pushed?
    A 2000 study found that nearly 25% of physicians who explain prenatal test results put a negative spin on a finding of Down syndrome, or actively encourage the parents to terminate the pregnancy. Furthermore, a 2005 survey of mothers with Down syndrome children uncovered a similar bias within the healthcare community when such a child was born.

    http://www.disaboom.com/parenting-and-family-general/abortion-rate-affected-by-down-syndrome-test
    But Krista Flint, director of the Canadian Down Syndrome Society, also talked with the Toronto paper and said families feel doctors encourage abortions by stressing the drawbacks to a baby with special needs.

    "It’s very dark," she said. "They hear a lot about the medical conditions that are sometimes associated with Down syndrome."

    "We know overwhelmingly the message families get is ‘Don’t have this baby, it will ruin your life,’ and I don’t think people would look at Sarah Palin and see a ruined life," Flint said. "Regardless of politics, I think it’s a good example."

    http://www.lifenews.com/2008/09/10/int-914/

    One of my friends had to flee the practice she had been going to — and I don’t use those words lightly — because they wouldn’t stop pressuring her to end the life of her son who has Down syndrome. Her pregnancy was already harrowing, she was as anxious as any first-time pregnant mother would be and nervous about having a child with special needs. The pressure to abort was way too much, though. She finally found a practice mid-pregnancy that supported her belief that having Down syndrome was not a capital offense. Her son is awesome, by the way


    http://mommyish.com/pregnancy-health/my-obgyn-wont-do-abortions-thats-why-i-chose-her-851/

    Plus plenty of first hand anecdotal evidence from a pediatric home care nurse working in a country where abortion is encouraged.
    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    That's painfully obvious.

    Perhaps you could enlighten me as to the essential differences between performing a late term abortion, long past the stage of foetal viability, and killing the child outside of the womb? One is deemed ok, one isn't.


  • #25
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    That a US study, is it really the same here?


  • #26
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    prinz wrote: »
    ...
    Perhaps you could enlighten me as to the essential differences between performing a late term abortion, long past the stage of foetal viability, and killing the child outside of the womb? One is deemed ok, one isn't.

    Is that the same as removing treatment that is sustaining the mechanics of life.


  • #27
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    BostonB wrote: »
    That a US study, is it really the same here?

    We're lucky enough to live in a country that ascribes a right to life to the unborn, regardless of whether they have Down's Syndrome or not. So with regards to Ireland itself it's a hypothetical argument.


  • #28
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Thus in Ireland, you'd have to go full term even with a dying baby in the womb.


  • #29
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    BostonB wrote: »
    Is that the same as removing treatment that is sustaining the mechanics of life.

    Eh, what?
    BostonB wrote: »
    Thus in Ireland, you'd have to go full term even with a dying baby in the womb.

    Put it this way, they don't go in and finish the dying baby off with a scalpel to speed things up. If your baby has died in the womb no you don't have to go full term. If the mother's life is in danger it becomes a legal grey area.


  • #30
    harr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,511 ✭✭✭harr


    Hi
    As a parent of a child with DS i would respect any couples right to have a abortion if they found out early enough,we often spoke about this before we had kids and we felt that we would have been unable to cope with a child who had special needs.
    None of my wife's scans showed anything was wrong with the baby so it came as a big shock when we found out,so glad now that we never found out our little man is the best in the world and is starting pre school next week.
    Its not the case that if a scan shows signs of DS your offered a abortion in Ireland,I had a friend who was told that there was a high chance his baby had DS but the little girl was fine.I hope the people who left some of the disgusting comments here are just trolling and looking for a rise out of people if not they are very narrow mined people.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    DublinWriter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,578 ✭✭✭DublinWriter


    It isn't an option in Ireland. The majority of hospitals wouldn't offer the prospective mother an elective amneocentisis in the first place.


Advertisement