Girl challenging abortion law on grounds of disability

[User273648]

I've name changed for this. A girl is challenging the right to abortion on the grounds of disability as she has Downs. I'd be really interested in opinions.

Personally, I have a cousin who has Downs. She is low functioning (the girl challenging is clearly high functioning as she lives alone supported by carers). My aunt and uncle struggle with it. My aunt admitted once that she had cried for the first two years. They found out at birth. She obviously loves her daughter but given the choice of the same child not having Downs' Syndrome she would wish for that.

Obviously this a very sensitive topic - I'm not intending to upset anyone...just listen to other points of view.

YABU - the law should be changed so it's equal regardless of disability
YANBU - the law should stay similar to how it currently is.

www.dsrf-uk.org/downrightdiscriminationcase/

she’s trying to make the limit the same - 24 weeks for all situations.

And I have already (twice) pointed out what the consequences of that would be for those women whose pregnancies were impacted by the most complex and serious abnormalities. They would be forced to carry to term and then give birth to babies with little to no prospect of life. I'd like to know if you're happy with that.

If abortion were no longer possible on grounds of disability we would see a return to the lifelong institutionalisation of thousands of disabled people.

Unless the pro-lifers practice what they preach and adopt.

I don't think the law should change. I think you need to have minimum average IQ to make the choice to have a dc. It is not just about the rights of the mother. It's about the rights of a new human being brought into the world for all the wrong reasons.

I don't think this issue is limited to DS though and I actually think more vulnerable people should currently come under this law not less.
Unless you can bring a dc into this world and look after it yourself then people should consider why anyone would freely allow this. You can't consider this effectively if you haven't got the IQ. And the argument that something could happen to you rendering you less able later on than when you had a dc is a separate argument, my issue would be the intention to bring dc into the world when only the mother is considered vs the dc as well.

@timekeeper1 what 'pain receptors thing' are you talking about being proven false?

I think you might be a bit confused about anaesthesia. The links you gave only talk about its use during abortions. It is recommended and used during foetal surgery and there are plenty of studies explaining and supporting its use even during the second trimester. It has actually been shown to reduce the risk of complications for the foetus and the mother (premature labour can be triggered due to foetal distress).

I think you need to have minimum average IQ to make the choice to have a dc.

Unsure of your point here? If a mother has an intellectual disability that would have an impact in her ability to parent safeguarding would kick in to support her, or in extreme cases an application made to the court of protection to remove the child at birth.

Is it any coincidence that USA is full of right-wing neoliberal men who never have to live with the consequences of their decisions, and simply want to control women?

I find this statement very false, in that pro-life organisations, from my experience, are run by a lot of strong-willed women who simply have a different opinion than I do.

They get their toxic ideology from the male dominated religious institutions, which have been designed to keep women in servitude by controlling their fertility.

They are like the funtionshaftling (kapos) in Auschwitz. This is very much a feminist issue.

I find this statement very false

Then you’re not looking hard enough.

I do find it ironic that America hate abortion...yet happily approve the death penalty

I do find it ironic that America hate abortion...yet happily approve the death penalty confused

Outdated. Pew surveys have found majority support for abortion

They get their toxic ideology from the male dominated religious institutions, which have been designed to keep women in servitude by controlling their fertility

The vast majority are Christian, but a lot more Catholic than Evangelical (which are more the controlling stereotypes come from). They simply have different views, they are hardly controlled by men. You are very dismissive of their agency here.

I find it appalling she wants to deny others an abortion due to her own personal circumstances. Maybe she can deal with her child’s disability. Not everybody can, my cousin has Down’s syndrome. Doesn’t talk, doesn’t communicate and has to has a lot of extra support. When his parents are no longer able to look after him he will have to go into a home. After all those years at home, how traumatic is this going to be. Plus when his parents are no longer around for him, then what?

I've had an abortion at 26 weeks.

I didn't have my 20 week scan til the 22nd week, where it picked up a heart defect. Then there was another two week wait for a confirmation scan. Then another two week wait for the actual abortion.

The choices were have an abortion. Give birth and let the baby die. Or give birth and spend months in an out of hospital, with the baby having operations, waiting for a heart transplant with the likelihood of the baby dying before his first birthday, and even he made it that far, the chances of him making it to adulthood were practically zero.

We chose an abortion. And that in itself was absolutely horrendous at that stage but easier than the other choices. And the heart defect was so severe, we could've aborted at any stage. I wouldn't wish that choice on my worst enemy but I'm thankful everyday that we did get to choose and I'm a hundred percent certain no one makes that choice lightly. It's awful and at that stage, you more or less have to give birth to a dead baby.

I will fight tooth and nail to keep it that way and support any woman's right to choose not to continue with a pregnancy for whatever reason. Everyone has put it far more eloquently than I have, but no one should be made to have a child they don't want for whatever the reason.

Abortion until birth for a cleft lip or club foot? Wtaf??

Abortion until birth for a cleft lip or club foot? Wtaf

Well no one would, would they?

Go through 8 months of pg and suddenly decide to terminate for a minor, correctable anomaly that had been detected at 20 weeks?

Abortion until birth for a cleft lip or club foot? Wtaf??

They’re associated with severe conditions including various syndromes and heart problems. I very much doubt anyone is having a late term abortion for a club foot.

If we take the emotion out of it, I still think Heidi's campaign doesn't make sense to me. If she feel pregnancies shouldn't be terminated because the foetus has the possibility of living a happy life, then she should be anti-abortion full stop because that could apply to any foetus whether healthy or some with abnormalities. She would have every right to hold this view.
If it's the discrepancy between gestational limits that doesn't make sense to me either. Differences aren't always discrimination. Looking at it another way say you find out you're pregnant the day of your missed period - 4 weeks, you have about 20 weeks to come to a decision.
Say you have abnormalities diagnosed unequivocally at your 20 week scan, you still have roughly the same amount of time to make the decision. You could argue the opportunities are equal (although in reality abnormalities are often confirmed later).
A finger prick could confirm your blood glucose instantly and you could get immediate treatment, it may take longer to diagnose cancer and start treatment. This isn't discrimination against people with cancer. It's not the condition but the diagnostics that makes the difference. There is a legal definition for discrimination and this is why I don't believe this is not met in this case. The number of chromosomes is not the only difference. All other things aren't equal.
If Heidi wants to highlight that not all people with Down's Syndrome have a poor quality of life all power to her, absolutely. It doesn't link to changing abortion rights though. Her case would have to rest on a Down Syndrome pregnancy being virtually identical to a healthy pregnancy before it would follow treating it differently was discrimination.

Kurtans

It is very important that voices like yours are heard.

We chose an abortion. And that in itself was absolutely horrendous at that stage but easier than the other choice

Exactly. There are no easy choices in that situation. Some people seem to think a late abortion is some kind of easy, selfish way out. In fact it may be the least selfish choice. In every case it will be physically horrible and emotionally awful as well. People should be allowed the extra time needed in the event that problems aren't detected until later on in pregnancy. Bringing a child into the world for a lifetime of suffering is nothing to be proud of. And even problems seen as minor can have a very detrimental effect on the sufferer.

SonEtLumiere
But many people decline tests because they would not terminate, and many people who know their baby will have DS are happy to proceed.

In Denmark all children with Down syndrome have been eliminated

‘Eliminated’ is a really horrible way to phrase it.

" I would like there to be an honest discussion about disgust and hostility towards disability and the desire to elimination/eradication."

I think there's a difference between elimination and just not wanting something for yourself. I hold absolutely no disgust or hostility toward children with DS, ASD, or any other disabilities. However if and when any of these are detectable if I was pregnant with a baby with ones of these disabilities I would choose an abortion. Not because I want people like this eliminated but because I don't have the tools to cope with a disabled child, nor do I want the possible life long caring responsibilities that come with it.

Elimination/eradication implies getting 'rid' of all members of a group (in this case people with DS) on a nation wide level. I don't think anyone unrelated would tell a woman to abort her baby with DS because they don't want a person with DS in the country. More that more individuals in Denmark choose not to have a baby with DS themselves, and this could be for a whole host of complex reasons that no out outside the mother, and possibly the father too, know or have the right to judge about.

It should be the mother's choice. If all mothers choose not to have children with down's or children who are deaf or blind or both that's fine. If none make that choice to abort that's fine too but I do not want the mother's choice to be removed.

Is it even possible to diagnose deafness or blindness in utero?