to think that if those care workers had done what they did to NT kids rather than learning disabled adults the sentences would have been more severe?

[Greensleeves]

I watched the documentary about Winterbourne View and it was one of the saddest things I have ever seen. I think the sentences are a joke. Wayne Rogers in particular delighted in torturing powerless people who couldn't defend themselves.

I can't help wondering whether the sense of public outrage, and the severity of the sentences, would have been greater if the victims had not been SN adults?

and

How is it different Brycie? Genuine question.

The logic of your argument is flawed Virginia.

My logic is:
If the child is not disabled - keep the child.
If the child is disabled - abort the child.

The necessary condition is the disability, not the fact that it is a child. You are rejecting the child on the basis of disability not on the basis that it exists. So you are rejecting the child, not because you don't want a child, but because you don't want a child with a disability.

Your logic is
If there is a child - abort it.

There is no second condition.

So the logic doesn't compare. The same goes for what you say Brycie.

I agree with Brycie, it's insulting to say the fears of a parent with a healthy child are in any way the same as a the fears of a parent with a child who has a disability.

Crashdoll, she's not ignoring it, she's saying that discriminiation and the desire/willingness to terminate are all part of the same thing.

Cailin, what about a woman who has a disabled child, then chooses to abort a second child with the same disability? Are you then suggesting she doesn't care for her existing child? Because I don't think many other people would.

I'm not disagreeing in a sarky way, this is such a terrible thing to be talking about isn't it.

I mean it must be talked about but some people are living it.

I disagree that they're the same thing but I do see what she's saying.

No Cailin: Virginia and I say the same thing.

You suggest that the rejection of a child-to-be with disabilities represents the dislike and rejection of all children and adults with disabilities.

Logically then: the rejection of a child-to-be without disabilities would represent the dislike or rejection of all children and adults without disabilities.

Ok, so I would abort a Downs child because, having a brother with Downs means I know exactly what the difficulties of it can mean.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that because I would abort I AUTOMATICALLY DO NOT LOVE MY BROTHER?

Seriously? Would you say that to my face or just from behind your keyboard?

I have carried out research on Down syndrome crashdoll, and it is a finding of that research that people with DS have the same levels of satisfaction with their lives as anyone else. You're assuming looking from the outside that they might not have satisfaction, I've actually asked hundreds of people with DS and they've said, yes, they're happy and they score the same anyone else on objective life satisfaction ratings. Why shouldn't they? They have problems, like everyone else, but they also have love and happiness and all the good things in life. Any assumption that they don't have a happy life needs to be examined, unless there's an actual basis for that assumption.

I'm not sure what your point is when you say that mental illness is a disability - is it that we should be able to test for these disabilities and abort if they're present?

Yes I also disagree that they are the same thing.

But aborting a child due to the disability does not mean inherent discrimination against disabled people! That's what I'm trying to say. I have a disability, I struggle to look after myself most days. If I got pregnant and found out my child had a severe disability, (which is a 1 in 4 chance due to the genetic condition I have) I would have to seriously consider if I could raise that child and be a good parent. I'm not discriminating against the hypothetical child with the disability, I'm looking at my own limitations.

Have you asked the parents of children with DS whether they have the same levels of satisfaction as parents of children without?

Bet you haven't.

I'm not sure what your point is when you say that mental illness is a disability - is it that we should be able to test for these disabilities and abort if they're present?

I was stating it because you seemed to imply it wasn't a disability. You are also putting words into my mouth. As someone who has lived with mental illnesses, I see that often conditions change, some disabilities do not.

Also, you're focusing on Down's Syndrome but people terminate pregnancies for lots of other (disability) reasons too.

No I wouldn't say that to your face Virginia because I have some tact. This is a theoretical discussion in a forum, which is a different thing. Would you call me unhinged to my face?

Yes. If you came out with the same shit in real life as you do here.

But that is your contention isn't it?

and while it might be theoretical for you, for some of us this is a real issue in our real lives.

Cailin do you have a child or a relative with a disability? Have you come on this thread just to talk about termination?

No I haven't carried out that research Virginia. And I have seen how parents of children with disabilities struggle. It is mostly, in fact I would say almost entirely, due to the way society treats them and their children. And that's what I'm talking about there.

No loving parent begrudges their child hundreds of hospital trips, hours of care, or all the hundreds of other difficulties that can comes as a direct consequence of a disability. What grinds them down IME is people not talking to their children, not asking about their children, HCPs denying basic care, the lack of support from government agencies supposed to be helping them, the implication that they are scroungers for getting DLA etc, the lack of certainty about future care. These are all very real things that parents of children with disabilities face. And at the very core of it is the belief by the NHS that children with disabilities shouldn't be born in the first place, a belief that many, many people agree with.

Yes my sister has cerebral palsy Brycie, and a few of my cousins have autism. I suspect my mother and other sister also have ASD.

Thank you for telling me, you didn't have to, I just suddenly thought it WAS a case of a pro-life campaigner coming on mumsnet to bandwagon on a particularly harrowing subject. Sorry.

There's a difference between saying 'I would abort a DS baby', which is a personal decision, and 'The state should encourage DS screening', which is a form of eugenics.

The state should offer screening. Why shouldn't they? I doubt I would abort a baby with Down's Syndrome but I would want to know. I'd want to be informed in all areas.

No need to be sorry, I do think it's relevant at this point in the discussion. I don't consider myself a pro-lifer, though I don't think I really fit in the pro-choice category either, as you can tell. I'm am not 100% anti-abortion but I do think there is a moral obligation to consider the reasons for abortion and the time limits in which it can be performed. Anyway apart from the disability screening issue I think that's outside the scope of this discussion.

I'll say again on a societal level the NHS offers screening on disabilities for financial reasons, it costs money to care for a disabled child/adult medically.

It shows no judgement on their value as a human being.

If that was their aim to weed out the 'unworthy' and save the 'worthy' they would screen for GBSS. GBSS is far more prevelant than spinabifida and affects babies regardless of ableness. So why not screen for it??

Because to screen for GBSS costs more than it saves long term, screening for spinabifida/DS etc costs less than it saves long term.

Simple Maths, nothing to do with an inherent sociatek rejection of disability.