Current campaign to stop abortion of Down’s syndrome after 24 weeks scares me *Content Warning edited by MNHQ*

[olivehater]

It’s seems to be gaining traction and support on social media. It terrifies my that women’s rights to autonomy over their own bodies could be eroded over so called discrimination of the disabled. Where does it end? Down’s syndrome is just one of Many anomalies picked up in screening tests. Why should it be singled out?
Women should be able to make their own choices as they will be the ones left raising these babies. I don’t think it will be entertained but it is worrying all the same the support it has on social media.

Social media isn't real life, see the general election results, the 'campaign ' against JK Rowling for being 'transphobic' for a couple of examples. Things still have to go through the entire legal process.

I wasn't aware of this campaign. This would be a huge change in the law and I don't think it will become law.

Having had a baby with patau’s syndrome, I agree entirely that it is an ill thought out campaign. Someone I liked shared this on Facebook and I was just so annoyed at the limited understanding of the whole situation it displayed. Changing the law in the way they suggest would have meant that I would have continued to be pregnant with a child who was inevitably going to die, whilst I just waited for it to happen

I can’t see it happening. This is far too complex to regulate.

I would be delighted by a change in the law. The current law is barbaric and highly ableist. Why should it be legal to kill a viable foetus on grounds of disability?

Gosh, @Danniii, because forcing a woman to continue with an wanted pregnancy wouldn’t be ‘barbaric’ at all?

Isn't the change to bring the limit on abortions for foetuses with Down Syndrome in line with the laws for abortion of other foetuses? Or have I mis-understood?

If it is that then I guess the argument about forcing women to continue with a pregnancy might seem less compelling.

Why should it be legal to kill a viable foetus on grounds of disability

Because not everyone feels they are able to look after a child with disabilities. I understand that ds is a huge spectrum, I'm not sure my husband and I would be able to cope with the extreme and until the child is a few years old, there is no telling where they fall on the ability scale.
I would find having the abortion difficult, but ultimately the knowledge that I would not be able to give that child the best life for them would make the decision for me.

@Danniii123
I'm guessing you're against abortion for any reason then? Are you also against having life support removed for people who are only being kept alive with machines? Withdrawing treatment for those at end of life instead of palliative care?
It's not such a simple case.

24 weeks is the normal limit, and a month after the main anomaly scan. So even though those 4 weeks might be the most horrible of your life, there is still plenty of time for a TOP based on scan findings.

To have a TOP beyond 24 weeks, there has to be fairly serious medical reasons. Not everyone wants to class Down Syndrome at that level of seriousness (though of course there can be cases where eg cardiac issues make it so). But what good would extending the time limit do? Turn the awful 4 weeks into 6 or 8? I'm not sure that would be helpful

It's not about not being able to not have an abortion and not having a choice. it's about aborting a pregnancy after 24 weeks because of Down's syndrome. A baby born with Down's is not going to die and will live well into their 50's. If the baby is going to die not long after they are born then that's different. People will still be able to have the same choices of abortion but within the 24 week time frame.

I’m against the proposed change in the law because although I may choose to bring a child with DS into the world, and love them dearly; I’d also be making the choice for my other children to take second place to their disabilities and to assume responsibility for that child when I’m too old or unable to provide care for them. That’s a huge burden and I wouldn’t do it to them. I say this as someone with a close friend who at 23 had to assume full responsibility for a non verbal, violent sibling with DS following her parent being diagnosed with Parkinson’s and going into care and it has impacted her life profoundly. She loves her sibling but she can’t make any life choices without considering them, supported living is out of the question as extended family accused her of being cruel to sibling and dumping them on the state.

"A baby born with Downs is not going to die and will live well into their 50s"? In some cases.. A significant minority. But high rates of neonatal death, leukaemia, cardiac issues and dementia make life expectancy very uncertain.

Having a tfmr is a horrendous experience, particularly in late pregnancy. It's going to be a vanishingly rare number of cases where someone would have such a late termination, and most likely due to complications such as unsuitable cardiac anomalies.

Unsuitable = unsurvivable

Because not everyone feels they are able to look after a child with disabilities.

If you don’t feel you could look after a child with disabilities then you shouldn’t have a child. There are no guarantees that any unborn baby won’t be disabled. I have 2 severely disabled children, nothing was picked up on the scan. DD was premature and has cerebral palsy, DS is deaf, visually impaired, epileptic and has severe learning difficulties but we don’t know why exactly. Anybody who chooses to have a baby should be ready to love and care for that baby even if they have a disability, you can’t pick and choose your children.

@Royalyscrewed, I agree with you. I have a child with a genetic condition who may one day live independently, we hope. Her sibling may have to continue to provide some level of care for her in the future. I have a 50/50 chance of having a child with the same condition who could be even more severely limited. I just don’t have it in me to provide more care, especially for a child with similar or more serious needs than my dd. I would terminate if testing indicated a genetic abnormality if I happened to become pregnant again.

It’s not just about women not wanting a child with additional needs, a child with DS will need a lot of extra care for a long time. Sometimes, you’re already at your limit and you can’t give more.

@tootiredtoclean if you are going to plague us with your rubbish then at least educate yourself first before embarrassing yourself.

DS can come with complications. That can be fatal.

you can’t pick and choose your children

Well you can to an extent. Thanks to abortions.

I'd guess there has only been a tiny handful of these cases. As the anomaly scan is at 20wks and downs screening happens at 12wks, I'd imagine it's only very late attenders who happen to have a baby with DS who would terminate after 24wks.

My hunch that campaigners want to use this is to move towards restricting other termination rights as much as I hate a slippery slope argument

There were only 18 terminations for downs post 24 weeks in the uk in 2018 (and around 200 post 24 week terminations overall).

In addition we dont know if the downs was the only reason for termination or if there were accompanying medical conditions. It is possible that some of these could have been diagnosed post 24 weeks with amnio at 20 weeks plus a wait for results.

It is so important that we dont erode a woman's right to choose for a few cases that quite possibly had other complicating factors. Plus do we really want a baby to be born into a household where it is not wanted or the £millions needed to case for such a child and adult over its lifetime diverted away from others needing health or education services.

I say the above as a parent of a severely disabled child who did not know about the disabilty until after birth.

I think this is a highly manipulative campaign which, at it's heart, promotes forced pregnancy.

The thing that really pisses me off about this BS is that anyone going against Heidi and giving good arguments why DS foetus' should be allowed to be aborted is going to be attacked by uneducated and oversensitive pro birthers.

I've already seen on twitter pages and pages of BS about how wonderful and strong she is along with countless pictures of Babies with DS.

Which has nothing to do with the debate.

I have 2 severely disabled children, nothing was picked up on the scan

So you had screening? If something had been picked up, would you have wantee a choice?

My DSis is very severely autistic. She non-verbal, but a very funny and charming soul who is loved and who we can't imagine our family without. But my parents have been honest and said that had they known at screening they'd probably have terminated, and probably gone on to have a child who would be just as loved but who would not have required so many personal sacrifices on my parent's part.

When you have a baby you roll a dice, and you do need to be prepared to raise a children with additional needs or a disability. That doesn't mean that the choices parents do have access to should be restricted though.

How many terminations of pregnancy post 24 weeks on the basis of Trisomy 21 alone have happened in the last five years?

It’s not uncommon for forced birth activists to use public discomfort about extremely rare or even non-existent circumstances to push for restrictions of choice.

I hope this does not become law. Having a disabled child does not only affect the parents, many siblings end up being responsible for disabled siblings when their parents become elderly, infirm or pass away. I have a nephew who is severely autistic & will never be able to live independently, much as he is a lovely boy I can see a time when his twin may have to become responsible for her brother's care. I know autism is not life threatening, but downs syndrome & many other disabilities can be. Having a limit of 24 weeks for terminations could leave parents with very little time to make decisions, it only needs a 20 week anomaly scan to be a few days over or for it to become clear that dates are wrong for the four weeks to the 24 week limit to become three or even two weeks & knowing the pressure that clinics whether they are NHS or not are under leaves very tight time constraints to get a termination done before 24 weeks if needed.