Support NeoGAF

[PdotMichael]

I still don't get praying for something that they never considered alive or having apriest come in. What are they praying for?

It's alive from the very beginning.
Every society defines the point when a fetus becomes a human being and it gives the fetus the right to live differently though.

 

[Aiustis]

I think the complication comes from the question of choice

Abortion is there to allow women to terminate an unwanted pregnancy - maybe they aren't ready for a child, there was a failure of contraception.

But in these cases with screening, I would assume most/all of the women wanted the pregnancy (or they would have had an abortion already). So the question of choice is no longer 'do you want a child' - it's 'do you want *this* child'

I don't know how I feel about this. Luckily both of our children were born healthy but I have a cousin with a severe disability from birth. What about choosing because you screen and find out it's a girl but you already have girls and really want a boy? At what point should choice be limited?

I'm okay with this too.

 

[JaggedSac]

I think the complication comes from the question of choice

Abortion is there to allow women to terminate an unwanted pregnancy - maybe they aren't ready for a child, there was a failure of contraception.

But in these cases with screening, I would assume most/all of the women wanted the pregnancy (or they would have had an abortion already). So the question of choice is no longer 'do you want a child' - it's 'do you want *this* child'

I don't know how I feel about this. Luckily both of our children were born healthy but I have a cousin with a severe disability from birth. What about choosing because you screen and find out it's a girl but you already have girls and really want a boy? At what point should choice be limited?

If you agree a woman has the choice to get an abortion, the reason is irrelavent and impossible to derive in a court. She could merely say she changed her mind and no longer wanted a child at all.

 

[Kthulhu]

Forcing a woman to have a child is wrong, period.

Might as well develop a test for classical autism and remove those fetuses as well.

Where to stop though.

As someone with Autism, it's barely comparable. Not to mention many of these women might not have the financial means of caring for a child with down syndrome or autism.

If your a child born into a family that can barely care for you, your life will be hell. Better to end it and try again then force someone to suffer.

 

[FiggyCal]

I remember when I made the assumption with an ex who had a Down's Syndrome relative that we'd abort any potential child who could have it. Not a good conversation.

DId you just not know about her relative? How did you find out?

 

[kirblar]

So could Down Syndrome be potentially eradicated from a genetic perspective?

If no Down Syndrome children are ever born, then the chances of those specific genetic abnormalities would eventually lessen to the point of disappearing?

I might be completely misinterpreting the science here.

It's a routine error during either egg or sperm production. You can't eradicate it because it could happen at random to anyone.

 

[theWB27]

I think the complication comes from the question of choice

Abortion is there to allow women to terminate an unwanted pregnancy - maybe they aren't ready for a child, there was a failure of contraception.

But in these cases with screening, I would assume most/all of the women wanted the pregnancy (or they would have had an abortion already). So the question of choice is no longer 'do you want a child' - it's 'do you want *this* child'

I don't know how I feel about this. Luckily both of our children were born healthy but I have a cousin with a severe disability from birth. What about choosing because you screen and find out it's a girl but you already have girls and really want a boy? At what point should choice be limited?

Your scenario isn't what is happening here. Slippery sloping this issue with healthy kids wont get you a good answer.

 

[commedieu]

So could Down Syndrome be potentially eradicated from a genetic perspective?

If no Down Syndrome children are ever born, then the chances of those specific genetic abnormalities would eventually lessen to the point of disappearing?

I might be completely misinterpreting the science here.

I don't think so. Isn't it just random..?

 

[radios shipping overview]

So abortion is murdering one of God's children, BUT:

That child of God will spend their whole life needing the care of others, even as an adult, with associated medical costs, SO:

They are inherently unable to function in a starkly capitalist system that places blame on individuals for their own medical problems and lack of ability to be a productive worker bee, SO:

It's not okay to kill babies in the womb, but it's okay to let the system kill them as adults, or expect that they will have family members that will support them their entire lives.

 

[Impeccable]

Interesting.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

only issue I could see here is that for those born with down syndrome there would be almost no toehrs sharing their fate.

 

[Thornton Reed]

So could Down Syndrome be potentially eradicated from a genetic perspective?

If no Down Syndrome children are ever born, then the chances of those specific genetic abnormalities would eventually lessen to the point of disappearing?

I might be completely misinterpreting the science here.

I think you are.

There will always be a percentage of people who won't have the screening so I cannot see the condition ever being irradiated. My wife had the screening and a couple of her friends were shocked she did. Those people will always exist. There are varying degrees of downs and some people can lead a very normal and independent life with it.

 

[Eye for an Eye]

Might as well develop a test for classical autism and remove those fetuses as well.

Where to stop though.

I terminated for an autism condition called Fragile X. It is one of the only genetically detectable forms of autism.

Women are going to make a decision that is best for themselves. There is a vast list of reasons that women choose termination. But Down's is a very common reason, but they're also failing to mention that nearly 60-70% of babies diagnosed with Down's do not survive past thier fifth birthday or die in utero because of other medical complications. Most commonly are heart complication that may or may not be fixed through multiple lifetime surgeries. Down's isn't just funny looking eyes and chubby kids because they have gastro problems, having an extra chromosome can cause significant development issues, physically and mentally.

 

[skullmuffins]

I wouldn't characterize people with Down syndrome as living a life of suffering or anything like that - certainly there are many happy kids with the disorder - but it is unquestionably something that puts extra lifelong challenges on both the child and the parent(s). I don't have a problem with a woman choosing to terminate a pregnancy because she simply doesn't want a child at that time, so I definitely don't have a problem with someone choosing to not bring a child they know will have a severe disability into the world. I'm not going to judge a mother for not feeling up to the task of raising a special needs child. If I was in that situation I'd almost certainly choose to terminate as well.

 

[spons]

As someone with Autism, it's barely comparable. Not to mention many of these women might not have the financial means of caring for a child with down syndrome.

Unless you have proper health insurance, a child with autism will probably cost the same as someone with down syndrome. Coaching, special education, therapy, etc. It's just a question of whether you want to put up with it.

That's up to the pregnant person in question to decide.

Oh, it's not a morality argument, it was a literal question for people about what disorder would constitute a reason to remove a fetus. What to expect from your child and that person as an adult with some specific disorder, the cost, the care, and so on.

 

[nekkid]

I'm okay with this too.

Wow, I don't even know how to process that opinion.

 

[SRG01]

Another thing to note is that Down's Syndrome is a spectral disorder. Some people may live limited but very functional lives, and others may be severely handicapped.

It's a difficult choice for sure, and extremely difficult to ascertain the severity of the condition prior to birth.

 

[StoneFox]

Support abortion under any circumstances.

Respect people's choice to have children with special needs.

Support services for people with special needs.

This is my stance as well. An unwanted child does not have more right to live than the mother's choice, and we need to support those children that are carried to term.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

DId you just not know about her relative? How did you find out?

No I knew, the relative had since passed so I made the comment without thinking. Still, ugly moment.

 

[JeTmAn81]

That's not eliminating Down Syndrome. That's eliminating people with Down Syndrome.

 

[JakeD]

the article mentions the test is 85% accurate, but only in the context of false-negatives. what about false positives?

i remember me and my wife not taking the test years ago, because our research at the time suggested it wasn't quite accurate enough to make life or death decisions on.

 

[Damaniel]

So could Down Syndrome be potentially eradicated from a genetic perspective?

If no Down Syndrome children are ever born, then the chances of those specific genetic abnormalities would eventually lessen to the point of disappearing?

I might be completely misinterpreting the science here.

There's generally no parental genetic flaw that causes the problem - it's an error that occurs randomly and can occur in any pregnancy, which means that you can't really eradicate it, nor can we even reduce the incidence with current technology. Screening (and termination, when the mother decides this is the best course of action) is really the only thing we can currently do.

 

[Roo]

As someone who has seen first hand couples handling kids with Down syndrome, I wouldn't blame anyone for looking at abortion as a viable alternative if they are given the information in time.

I have nothing but respect for those parents that go with it and try to raise a DS kid the best they can but it's an everyday battle for the rest of their life not everyone is capable to deal with.

 

[Thornton Reed]

Interesting read, related to the discussion

bridget jones actress talks about her son who's got downs

 

[Phu]

I think the complication comes from the question of choice

Abortion is there to allow women to terminate an unwanted pregnancy - maybe they aren't ready for a child, there was a failure of contraception.

But in these cases with screening, I would assume most/all of the women wanted the pregnancy (or they would have had an abortion already). So the question of choice is no longer 'do you want a child' - it's 'do you want *this* child'

I don't know how I feel about this. Luckily both of our children were born healthy but I have a cousin with a severe disability from birth. What about choosing because you screen and find out it's a girl but you already have girls and really want a boy? At what point should choice be limited?

I don't think it matters much. I don't think anyone needs to justify not having a child. Heck, some people go through with the pregnancy, have the child, and immediately give them up for adoption. No one should be obligated to go through with it and I don't even think they need to give the reason because it ultimately shouldn't matter. Some people may want a kid at some point, but don't want a kid right now so may still get an abortion, which is still a matter of not wanting *this* child. The choice shouldn't be limited because the choice is simply whether you want an abortion or not, not why you may want one.

 

[Eye for an Eye]

I think you are.

There will always be a percentage of people who won't have the screening so I cannot see the condition ever being irradiated. My wife had the screening and a couple of her friends were shocked she did. Those people will always exist. There are varying degrees of downs and some people can lead a very normal and independent life with it.

Down's happens when the egg meets the sperm. It's not something that the mother or father carries in thier genetics.

Stuff like cystic fibrosis, sma, sickle cell, huntington's, fragile x, and a whole long list of other things are in the genetics of the parents. Some require a copy from the mother and father and some just requires one copy. Many people are carriers of genetic conditions, but you have to partner with someone that carries the same gene.
Now, many will use 23 and me and other chromosome testing companies to find out if they are a carrier and their partner is a carrier. If only one is, on a recessive gene, then they'll not do anything about it. 99% of couples do not terminate a pregnancy for a carrier child of a recessive disorder. Now dominate disorders, like huntington and fragile x, that's different.

 

[PdotMichael]

This is my stance as well. An unwanted child does not have more right to live than the mother's choice, and we need to support those children that are carried to term.

Questionable, at some stage of the development the right of the fetus should be above everything else.
And as society there should be a lot of support available for the child and provide the mother with several options.

 

[SRG01]

the article mentions the test is 85% accurate, but only in the context of false-negatives. what about false positives?

i remember me and my wife not taking the test years ago, because our research at the time suggested it wasn't quite accurate enough to make life or death decisions on.

There is a definitely a non-insignificant false positive rate with these tests. That's why there's another test that can be done late term -- not sure if that's the same test as the one in the article though.

Of course, having a late term test is completely useless in countries that don't offer late term abortions. Canada does, though.

Down's happens when the egg meets the sperm. It's not something that the mother or father carries in thier genetics.

Er, isn't Down's mostly caused by Triscopy 21, not sperm-egg fusion?

 

[Patrick Bateman]

So could Down Syndrome be potentially eradicated from a genetic perspective?

If no Down Syndrome children are ever born, then the chances of those specific genetic abnormalities would eventually lessen to the point of disappearing?

I might be completely misinterpreting the science here.

Down-Syndrome is not a hereditary disease like Haemophilia etc. that follows the laws of Mendel.
It just happens by chance.
There are certain affecting situations like becoming pregnant in a "high" age (40+ years) for example, but it's nothing you could somehow influence.

And btw. most men and many women with Down-Syndrome are sterile anyway, so there's a very small chance they can pass it on.

 

[Izuna]

Up to the parents

 

[kirblar]

As someone who has seen first hand couples handling kids with Down syndrome, I wouldn't blame anyone for looking at abortion as a viable alternative if they are given the information in time.

I have nothing but respect for those parents that go with it and try to raise a DS kid the best they can but it's an everyday battle for the rest of their life not everyone is capable to deal with.

This is where I'm at as well. I've seen the stress it puts on families- not just the parents, but also their other existing kids, who are going to have the responsibility passed on to them if/when the parents pass.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

A woman's choice is a woman's choice. I have no problem with this.

Wow, I don't even know how to process that opinion.

See above. You can't force a woman to give birth, period.

 

[g11]

If prenatal testing shows signs of...abnormalities, I can't blame a parent for choosing to terminate at that point. Although I'm not wild about the idea of abortion, I'm also not a complete hypocrite who would tell a woman she must carry a baby to term no matter what the circumstances while offering no state mandated medical assistance, maternal leave, or daycare to make sure any child has the best opportunity to succeed in the world and to make the process easier on the mother. If you want abortion off the table, offer a solution. Otherwise you're just a lot of empty talk.

 

[aeolist]

That's not eliminating Down Syndrome. That's eliminating people with Down Syndrome.

a fetus isn't a person

 

[Sectorseven]

Down's happens when the egg meets the sperm. It's not something that the mother or father carries in thier genetics.

Stuff like cystic fibrosis, sma, sickle cell, huntington's, fragile x, and a whole long list of other things are in the genetics of the parents. Some require a copy from the mother and father and some just requires one copy. Many people are carriers of genetic conditions, but you have to partner with someone that carries the same gene.
Now, many will use 23 and me and other chromosome testing companies to find out if they are a carrier and their partner is a carrier. If only one is, on a recessive gene, then they'll not do anything about it. 99% of couples do not terminate a pregnancy for a carrier child of a recessive disorder. Now dominate disorders, like huntington and fragile x, that's different.

Does in vitro fertilization prevent it?

 

[Kthulhu]

Unless you have proper health insurance, a child with autism will probably cost the same as someone with down syndrome. Coaching, special education, therapy, etc. It's just a question of whether you want to put up with it.



Oh, it's not a morality argument, it was a literal question for people about what disorder would constitute a reason to remove a fetus. What to expect from your child and that person as an adult with some specific disorder, the cost, the care, and so on.

You do realize that down down syndrome is more than a learning disability right? It also can seriously impact a person's physical health. Even then, many families don't have the money or time to take care of a child with a medical condition.

 

[nekkid]

See above. You can't force a woman to give birth, period.

But choosing to abort based on an unwanted sex is fucking terrible. And a dangerous precedent.

I guess being a horrible human being isn't illegal.

 

[Eye for an Eye]

the article mentions the test is 85% accurate, but only in the context of false-negatives. what about false positives?

i remember me and my wife not taking the test years ago, because our research at the time suggested it wasn't quite accurate enough to make life or death decisions on.

Generally after the blood screen tests that show positive, they will do further testing by CVS or amniocentesis. Those take dna from the baby and test it directly. It's a more invasive test, so it's only done if there is concern for an issue.

Some of the dating in that article feels very misleading for today. Today's NIPT's are much more accurate than previous blood screenings that tested particular levels in the mother's blood stream. NIPT's look for the baby's dna in the mother's blood and tests that.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Ted Cruz tweeted about this and now people have been calling the Icelandic people Nazis and claiming that they are boasting of genocide.

Seems fair to me.
Charging 25€ for a Pizza isn't that far removed from genocide as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Netherscourge]

I'm not sure how I personally feel about this, but my opinion should not have any bearing on the women making the decision whatsoever.

It's their choice. Not mine.

And certainly not Ted Fucking Cruz's.

 

[RdN]

Pre natal screenings + giving families a choice is a great thing.

Wish this would spread to other countries.

 

[emag]

One of the topics that's not discussed enough is how society will treat the children who do have Down's Syndrome and parents who didn't abort them. Beyond the social stigma (which may be even greater than today), will social spending programs be cut to penalize these families (or incentivize parents making the choice)?

Unless you have proper health insurance, a child with autism will probably cost the same as someone with down syndrome. Coaching, special education, therapy, etc. It's just a question of whether you want to put up with it.

Depends on how severe the autism is. ASD covers a wide range. (Also depends on how severe the Down's is.)

Your scenario isn't what is happening here. Slippery sloping this issue with healthy kids wont get you a good answer.

China and India already have tremendous societal problems stemming from -- and feeding into -- sex-selective abortions, which have wildly skewed the younger population overwhelmingly male. The argument can be made that early-term abortion is better than infanticide, but the former is also far more pervasive than the latter ever was (at least in modern times).

 

[Zoe]

a fetus isn't a person

To some people having the terminations, it is.

And way to miss the point.

 

[Madame M]

tbh I wish Ted Cruz were aborted

 

[thehypocrite]

Individual freedom at work. People are making their choices and living with the consequences. That's how it's supposed to work.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

That's not eliminating Down Syndrome. That's eliminating people with Down Syndrome.

The fetuses aren't people.

 

[SRG01]

Does in vitro fertilization prevent it?

No, it does not.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_of_Down_syndrome

 

[StoneFox]

Questionable, at some stage of the development the right of the fetus should be above everything else.
And as society there should be a lot of support available for the child and provide the mother with several options.

Why does an unwanted child have more rights than the woman carrying it? Childbirth has a very real chance of killing her, she should be allowed the choice to terminate it.

 

[Ultrarobotninja]

The Ted Cruz who'd want to strip anyone of proper care if they carried the baby to term? He can fuck off.

Qft.

 

[Deleted member 325805]

It would be selfish to keep a baby that you know has downs, the kid will never have a normal life. Abortion really is best for everyone involved in this situation.