To believe that Britain promotes eugenics.

[WriterofDreams]

I am aware this is going to be highly controversial and could upset some people but it's an issue that genuinely concerns me and I'm not just shit-stirring. I do expect to get flamed, but any reasonable argument or debate is very welcome.

I come from Ireland where abortion is illegal. I am fully aware that many Irish women go abroad for abortions so I'm not saying look how great we are we don't abort. However, until I moved to the UK I never heard of the practice of people testing their baby for anomalies and then aborting them if there was something wrong. It genuinely shocked me that a couple who tried to have a baby, went through the sometimes stressful process of ttc, got the longed-for bfp and then lived with the expectation of a baby for many weeks could then go and kill that baby because it had Down Syndrome or some other (non-lifethreatening) genetic condition. I have looked it up on a number of sites and extreme though it may appear I can't get past the feeling that this basically hidden eugenics.

What do you think?

Nope Trillian if you have sex you should be aware that there is some chance you will conceive a baby.

I am also quite shocked that people believe you need to "survive" having a child with disabilities as if it is some horrible trial.

Again Litchick citing lack of support only validates my case that disabled children are not properly valued in our society.

Franca I was proposing a hypothetical situation to duelfanjo. It's a well-known philosophical tool and not to be taken literally.

"Also I don't think the lack of support is a valid excuse for abortion" no writer much better to have the baby and let it fuck up the whole family, see if you can pop into full time poverty before it's five.

No shit Sherlock.

WoD I think the thread is disintegrating (perhaps as your intentions bcome clear) from a discussion of whether eugeneics is allowed/promoted in Britain to simply an argument for and against abortion.

And I will say again, as have others, Downs Syndrome is not inherited in a way that eugenics could ever have an effect on its prevalence. If you aborted every foetus with DS for the next 100 years such that there were no people with DS in the population, it would not prevent more DS foetuses from being conceived.

Sorry - that was to fluffy.

Of course women feel the pressure.
And it aint going to go away.
That's why we have to defend women's right to choose, like raging tigers.

Writer, I think you are very naive. I'm doubting whether you've ever had a baby. Survival is what we all do, we use that word about getting through the first year of a baby's life, especially if like ds3 they had reflux.

fluffyblanket Thu 28-Oct-10 17:49:36
'Fluffy, did you not consider who would care for your child before it arrived?'

Me. I'm not a planning sort, just figured I'd go to work when they went to school.

Well not if they're severely disabled you won't.

Wow Posie, I suggest you go on the disabilities board and tell people their children have fucked up their family. Is it really impossible for you to see a disabled child as anything but a burden? Can you not see that that child could be as loved and wanted and cherished as any other child? If someone came along and told you that having a child would send you into poverty (regardless of disability) because the government wasn't going to help you, would you just say alright then and abort or would you say hang on that's not good enough?

I don't understand your post Litchick.

give over fluffy.
I bet you'd find a lot of us on here involved in trying to improve things. But that's why they need improving ...cos they're shit. Chicken and egg, really.

"Having sex results in the creation of another person, if you don't realise that then maybe you have an issue which means you shouldn't be having sex."

Ah, now there's the kind of thinking that really does lead to eugenics. Thousands of mentally ill, educationally subnormal, disabled & addicted women were sterilised during the European eugenics programme circa 1950-1975, precisely because they were considered incapable of making informed choices about sex.

You do like telling other people what they "should" do with their lives, it seems ...

fluffy...such an apt name.

If I became pg tomorrow and found out my baby had Edwards syndrome and I kept it, it would fuck up my whole family. My young children would get very little attention, my time would be sapped, I wouldn't be able to work and to be frank I love the children I already have so much that I couldn't let that happen to them.

writer women have abortions every day of the week cos they can't afford it, disabled foetus or not.

These are choices women have to make.

'I am not talking about children who have no possibility of surviving. Why anyone would make a woman carry a child who won't survive is beyond me.'

The thing is though, many conditions have varying degrees of severity. You can't alays guarrantee that a baby will not survive. There would be no way to KNOW for sure which babies will defintaely die right away. Even babies with anencephely (a severe brain defect) can survive for a few hours in rare cases. In other cases, conditions considered milder such as Downs can be very severe. Sometimes with heart defects etc. I read somewhere that 20% babies with Downs have severe life threatening health issues. The vast majority of children with unbalanced chromosome problems are miscarried or stillborn so some being terminated may have survived. So it would be difficult to legalise late termination ONLY to fatal abnormalities.

Coming from Ireland and living in the UK, it can seem strange alright so I can see your point of view, however women in Ireland are in a horrific situation with no choice at all.

I remember my feeling of amazement when a colleague had IVF, found out the baby had Downs, aborted and then spoke about X's funeral and mourning etc. I don't judge her actions and understand them totally but found her approach very very odd. However this stems from the very different culture we come from.

Likewise I get very strange reactions when I explain to UK friends/colleagues that on my pregnancies I havent had any diagnostic tests beyond normal scans.

I can see what you're saying about the thread Trillian, that's why I didn't want to get dragged into the whole abortion thing, but I suppose it was inevitable. Still I think people have remained really level-headed which is unusual for a debate like this and I'm really grateful for all the contributions so far. It's bound to be an emotive issue but no one so far (apart from one poster) has resorted to name calling so I think it's a worthwhile discussion.

Writer....we're not talking about children that exist are we? So don't try the shite about telling families with children with disabilities that they have no joy, blah, blah, blah. Every living child makes a difference to their family. This is about the choice to abort not whether children with disabilities should exist.

I find this topic so difficult

If a mother decided to abort a baby with DS, which was then born prematurely and survived before the termination, what would happen then? would it be OK to kill that child? and if not why not?

what is the diffence to abort a child that could survive out of the womb, than to kill it at birth, or a week later?

I should add that I think the current limit is a disgrace. 12 weeks is time enough - 14 at a push. I really dont understand why it needs to be longer when all the tests are done by this period

WOD the point you are failing to acknowledge though is that a diagnostic test for Down's can only tell you if your baby has the disorder not how seriously they will be effected.

The vast majority of babies with Downs are not viable - they are either miscarried or die in utero. Those that reach full term and are born without health problems are the tiny minorirty.

So on the one hand you argue that it is not acceptable to make a woman carry a baby that will die either before or shortly after birth but on the otherhand criticise woman for terminating pregnancies where Downs has been diagnosed.

What about a baby who will probably die; or is more likely to die than not. What about if there is a 50/50 chance. Where do you draw the line? Which odds are acceptable?