Comfort or conflict: Earlier Down syndrome test

Originally posted by Pankaka
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

Yes, I am willing to abort the downey.

[snip] NO DOWNEYS IN MY HOUSE!

edit on 12/6/11 by masqua because: removed profanity

Then this:

What don't you understand about "NO DOWNEYS" in the "UNITED STATES of AMERICA."

Get out if you don't like it.

Sorry, not from USA, not understanding the reference and took it the way that beezer did, as an inappropriate comment, but if you meant something else, I'd be glad to hear the explanation.

Originally posted by Pankaka
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

What don't you understand about "NO DOWNEYS" in the "UNITED STATES of AMERICA."

Get out if you don't like it.

edit on 12-6-2011 by Pankaka because: American Eagle

It's people like yourself that were burning crosses a few decades go.
Begone, troll-boy. Your brand of hatred is not required here.

I don't know what the fuss is about but you guys are freedom haters.
Everyone has the right to abort a child with down syndrome.

If you don't like it, you could move out to the Middle East where you would get shot for saying America and freedom.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by whaaa

 

Apples/oranges. Political machinations and the life of an innocent are as far apart as truth and politics.

Oh really, innocents aren't killed because of political machinations. The pro life movement is also a political machination.

stoptheabortionagenda.com...

In actuality it's more about the control over a woman's body and political control over others, than protecting innocents.

reply to post by beezzer


Yep.

It's easy to be Pro Choice, when you're not the one getting killed.

Can't tell if you guys are either have a low IQ or just trolling.
Stop saying "WELL U SHUD B HAPPY CUZ U DIDNT GET ABORTED"
There is a high number of suicides and the most lines that come out of their mouths are "Buuhuuu I shouldn't even been born" and that is why in this great country abortion exist, so don't give me that bullsh!t.


America is for freedom.
Go back to your caves terrorists.

Double post.

Originally posted by Adamanteus
This is indeed a slippery slope. I feel that the parents have the right to decide in the case of something like Down's syndrome.

My reasoning is that with advances in medicine people are living much longer and to give birth to someone that will require care their entire life is a bit selfish since once the parents pass on the burden of care will be placed on other family members or the state.

This is now achieved with modern medicine and technology, think how it was several thousand years ago when they would give birth see the infant and decide either to throw it of the cliff or raise it. The end result is the same its the process that has changed.

Spartans.

reply to post by beezzer

Today it's Downs. Tomorrow? That's why I brought it up.

The fact of the matter is today it is totally fine to abort a 100% healthy fetus so Your question is a moot point.

NOW if the tests were used to make abortion of a fetus shown to have Down's syndrome mandatory I'd be right next to You on the whole eugenics/where do we draw the line stance.

As it stands the test is just a little more added information to help the mother decide (since men have no say whatsoever if their child can be born or not) if she wants to bring life into this world.

reply to post by whaaa


Putting it in that way, then yes, it is a political tool. Abortion is a moral dilema and something that should transcend politics though.
*sigh*
Perhaps, someday.

Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by beezzer

 

Yep.

It's easy to be Pro Choice, when you're not the one getting killed.

Short, sweet and to the point.
Brilliant.

It's a shame that this thread has turned into a pro choice/pro life debate...and I've been in so many of them I have no wish to be involved in another (pro choice btw)

I think though that the premise of the OP is that with these early tests is where else will it lead? There are already countries who use testing for gender where it is preferable to have a boy, meaning that many girls are aborted, and whilst that is a choice, I do think it is a choice for the wrong reasons.

I have a friend who had a downs child, bobby died age 15 but was one of the most amazing, friendly and loving humans you'll ever meet. He had a brilliant quality of life and everyone loved him and he loved everyone else. I have worked with a disability charity and have met some people with serious physical disabilities who have more ability in their little finger than many non disabled people have in their entire bodies.

But it is a choice that should be left to the individual and tests should be ethically sound before they are offered to pregnant women

reply to post by Adamanteus

Today it's Downs. Where would you draw the line? Just with diseses? Or would it be with birth defects? Imperfections? Not trying to be snarky, it's just that I see the potential for GREAT abuse here.

Originally posted by destination now
It's a shame that this thread has turned into a pro choice/pro life debate...and I've been in so many of them I have no wish to be involved in another (pro choice btw)

I think though that the premise of the OP is that with these early tests is where else will it lead? There are already countries who use testing for gender where it is preferable to have a boy, meaning that many girls are aborted, and whilst that is a choice, I do think it is a choice for the wrong reasons.

I have a friend who had a downs child, bobby died age 15 but was one of the most amazing, friendly and loving humans you'll ever meet. He had a brilliant quality of life and everyone loved him and he loved everyone else. I have worked with a disability charity and have met some people with serious physical disabilities who have more ability in their little finger than many non disabled people have in their entire bodies.

But it is a choice that should be left to the individual and tests should be ethically sound before they are offered to pregnant women

As I've stated, while I am anti-abortion, this is about (from what I can imagine) the potential for abuse. Birth defects, any number of diseases. The morality of abortion is one thing. The morality of using tests just to "perfect" your unborn child is another.

Thanks for your contribution.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Adamanteus

 

Today it's Downs. Where would you draw the line? Just with diseses? Or would it be with birth defects? Imperfections? Not trying to be snarky, it's just that I see the potential for GREAT abuse here.

I do not draw the line, that is for the parents contemplating abortion to do since they have the right to abort a 100% healthy fetus why is it wrong for them to want to abort one with medical problems/birth defects?

If it comes to mandatory/forced abortions against the parents will then I draw the line right there! It is for the PARENTS (well technically only the mother has a choice) to decide, not the government,church,You nor I to decide if someone gives birth or doesn't give birth to a baby.

I do see a potential with these tests for the government to say You took the test and were aware the child would require more help than you could financially afford and went ahead with the birth anyways so therefore You are not eligible for public assistance for said child.

reply to post by Adamanteus

You actually brought up a good point. With the advent of the Obama healthcare plan, with government footing the bill, would the potential for "enthusiastic" approaches to abortion in the case of defects become more prevalent?

You know about overpopulation-, financial- and other heavy problems such as rape, right?
Oh right, forgot about Christianity and politics.

Back to being freedom haters.

reply to post by beezzer


Well... I have a cousin who is Downs. I was talking with My aunt and uncle and They both said that if They had had the test...though They love Their daughter...They would have aborted the pregnancy. Their story is about the lifelong commitment to caring for so severely disabled individual.

And My cousin was lucky. When She was born, They tried to convince my aunt and uncle to put Her into a "home" (where They expected She would die within about a year). They didn't and cared for Her Themselves. Today She is 25 and though She needs assistance to live, She does have a simple job. Guess it's sort of a wash productivity-wise.

But yes. They would NOT have chosen to give birth to Her.

Originally posted by AmericanEagle
You know about overpopulation-, financial- and other heavy problems such as rape, right?
Oh right, forgot about Christianity and politics.

Back to being freedom haters.

No such thing as "overpopulation..." That is a myth We have been fed. Just sayin'.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
reply to post by beezzer

 

Well... I have a cousin who is Downs. I was talking with My aunt and uncle and They both said that if They had had the test...though They love Their daughter...They would have aborted the pregnancy. Their story is about the lifelong commitment to caring for so severely disabled individual.

And My cousin was lucky. When She was born, They tried to convince my aunt and uncle to put Her into a "home" (where They expected She would die within about a year). They didn't and cared for Her Themselves. Today She is 25 and though She needs assistance to live, She does have a simple job. Guess it's sort of a wash productivity-wise.

But yes. They would NOT have chosen to give birth to Her.

Thanks for sharing. Appreciate the honesty.