Campaign to remove prenatal tests

MangoFeverDream I am arguing the case for women's rights as I believe they should be, rather than defeated resignation to the way things are currently.

You used the phrase "things that make sense on an individual level could have negative societal consequences."

For me, bodily autonomy is an uncrossable line. Sovereignty over one's own individual body is the most fundamental human right. The alternative is a form of slavery and subjugation. I'll never accept the principle of diminishing a person's autonomy over their own body - with associated criminal sanctions - for a purported societal good.

Women do not owe an unwilling sacrifice of their bodily autonomy to the state, to men, to women, to girls. It isn't a resource for others to exploit for any agenda.

@MangoFeverDream do you have a disabled child? I can tell you now there are plenty of circumstances where bringing a child with multiple needs up is not something to be taken lightly. Very few people are willing to adopt either so that's not a practical solution.

People think they are pro life but they often don't think what kind of life their idealistic ideas would lead to.

I do disagree with this. It still amounts to "we'll punish women who fail to use their bodies in the way the state dictates. It's all for the good of their own sex, so they must use their bodies to serve the greater good, not themselves.

It’s fine for you to have this opinion, but you should also recognise that things that make sense on an individual level could have negative societal consequences.

Either a woman has autonomy over her own pregnancy or she does not

Errr .... very few places allow a woman to terminate pregnancy for any reason at any point in the pregnancy. Everywhere has restrictions to some degree so that doesn’t hold water. (You might and probably will say that women should be able to terminate for any reason at any time, but this isn’t the reality in most places, so is kind of irrelevant).

I guess one could argue that a fetus with Downs should have the same protection as a healthy fetus, ie no termination after 24 weeks in the UK (12 weeks in much of Europe). But good luck getting that passed, the overwhelming majority of women choose to terminate, even where there is a lot of financial support.

I was with him all the way till I read Ross ... is lobbying parliament to remove the NHS screening on grounds that it is prejudicial.

That boils my blood. To hell with men who want to remove a woman's right to make decisions concerning her life and body, including her pregnancy.

Playing Devil’s advocate here, but in China they will not tell you the sex of your child. The sonographer knows but will not tell you.

This is obviously to prevent aborting a female fetus. I have to say, I don’t disagree with this at all.

I do disagree with this. It still amounts to "we'll punish women who fail to use their bodies in the way the state dictates. It's all for the good of their own sex, so they must use their bodies to serve the greater good, not themselves."
Either a woman has autonomy over her own pregnancy or she does not.

Anything else amounts to a selective justification for "a woman must be forced to continue her unwanted pregnancy against her will, under threat of criminal punishment."

If a woman has real autonomy over her own body, there is no reason in the world that she can be prevented from making her own informed choice about her pregnancy.

Women cannot purchase better rights for our sex or ensure girls are better valued by society by submitting to the removal of our own bodily autonomy.

It's a paradox to think that the way forward for women and girls to be valued as full, autonomous, valuable people is by removing their bodily sovereignty under threat of criminal sanctions, so that we can be forced to produce children we don't want.

Disability rights don't go far enough, in my opinion. But it is a weird kind of backwards thinking which takes something valid and then retrofits it to deny women bodily autonomy and the choice to avoid physical, financial, relational and emotional difficulties in a society which does little to help.

I suppose this is 'disability rights' getting out of hand and forgetting the majority have a valid view too. I had all the pre-natal tests going as I know the strain on a family of caring for a child with 'severe issues' - I phrased it like that as I don't know what the current pc expression is.

I would very much back a campaign for more visibility for people with disabilities and much, much more support for them and their families to lead meaningful, stress free lives. I suspect we would find that a world which embraced the existence of people with disabilities would be a better world all round, for everyone. However, I don't think this issue is quite synonymous with sex selective abortion.

The implications for a society where males outnumber females by a large amount are bad for the males, who find there is far more competition to find a mate, and (even more) extremely dangerous for the females.

It would be possible to argue that a society without congenital disability would be less rich, but it wouldn't be actually dangerous for half the population.
.
I am not surprised at all by the Guardian's reporting this without any concern. It is a good example of a certain type of thinking that is becoming more prevalent. I find this really hard to express and hope somebody else will come along and help....

Basically it seems as if perfectly reasonable statements such as "People with congenital disabilities have a right to a meaningful life" or "Gay men can make great parents" get used to extrapolate wild conclusions such as "Women should not be allowed to screen for congenital conditions" and "Gay men have a right to a baby born by surrogate mother".

Is there a term for this type of argument or thought process? I'm trying to think of other examples and wonder if there are any that don't carry the undercurrent of misogyny?

It is not a life threatening or life limiting ‘illness

I know someone who lost their downs child as a toddler due to the many co morbid health conditions. It was extremely life limiting for the child.

I had the nipt test as an older mum. I would've terminated my pregnancy.

This is obviously to prevent aborting a female fetus. I have to say, I don’t disagree with this at all. Don’t forget that girls were once considered a burden to raise in China (though that’s fast changing for many reasons I won’t go into)

The question is not
"why do women need to know?"

The question is
"Why do people feel they are entitled to oversight of a woman's decisions about her pregnancy?"
and
"Why do people wish to prevent, criminalise and punish women for exercising bodily autonomy for ANY REASON?"

Why do I need to know?

Because it's my body, my information, my uterus, my health, my life, my decision and my informed choice.

Men who argue "withhold that woman's medical information from her so that she cannot make an informed decision, and ensure society facilitates the option to criminalise her for making decisions about her body that I want to prevent"
do not see women as full autonomous human beings.

No woman should ever be criminalised for any decision she makes about her own body and her own health. Her reasons need not be offered up for the scrutiny and approval of others.

Man had an ‘epiphany’ and wants to dictate to women they must all follow his new beliefs so that he feels his child is valued

I'd have a smidgeon more sympathy for his opinion if he had secured decent funding and facilities for disabled people and their carers.

@Wondermule thank you. Really well, has been cruising and crawling so we are hopeful that he will walk. It's a long road ahead though.

I can understand the successful, relatively healthy people with syndromes like Downs being upset over other people terminating pregnacys with serious medical conditions. It does make them look unwanted.
I've also seen a friend struggle with a decision.. fortunately for them, the further tests showed the baby had no Trisomy. But they didn't know if they could do it if the baby had had Trisomy.
I also had a University friend who knew that as an adult he would need to become the carer for a disabled sibling. He believed he could never have children of his own as his responsibility would be to his sister.

Like many things, this has to be a personal decision.

My neighbour's daughter with downs syndrome is non-verbal, has heart defects that necessitated early surgeries and will never live independently. She is also delightful and my neighbour didn't even consider termination but she said knowing in advance helped the whole family prepare.

By all means campaign for more funding and support for children with Down's syndrome so that women can feel supported to continue with their pregnancies

This doesn’t reduce the termination rate at all though, if you look at Scandinavia. The hard truth is that few would go through with such a pregnancy so this is the only real way.

That said, I’m absolutely against it. I would not choose to bring a child with Downs into the world.