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/

I get that forced birth is horrible but wouldn't a termination at this stage effectively be a birth anyway?

Forced birth isn't just about the birth. Even if the baby was then adopted, it's forced have a biological child out there in the world.

I will never forget reading a story of a women who had a late term abortion.

I think she was 37-38 weeks

They had discovered really late that the baby had severe defects and disabilities.

They wanted to see if the baby would survive and be pain free so consented to more tests.

By the time all the tests came back, she was heavily pregnant. Unfortunately the tests said that the baby was likely to live hours at best and would suffer during that time.

So she decided to terminate.

It was heartbreaking to read but I completely understood her stance.

She had to tell people it was a stillbirth because she was frightened what people would say if they had found out she terminated at such a late stage

As early as possible, as late as necessary

And how long does the "help" last?

Do they baby sit so the young ones can go back to school or college?

Do they suddenly have powers that surpass even the police and manage to keep their a abusive partners away from them the rest of their lives and have them not have to grant access to a man who uses the child to abuse the mother?

Can they cure cancer?

Wow...they are wasting their talents standing outside clinics...they could make a fortune solving the unsolvable

Heidi needs to wind her fucking neck in.
Honestly, she hasn’t got the foggiest idea what a late term termination is like. Why people have them. And how gut wrenching they are

She has every right to her opinion. Maybe you need to wind your neck in. After all, we don’t know what it’s like to live knowing that most parents would choose to get rid of people like her, and how that would make one feel.

I say this as someone who would 100% terminate a fetus that has a diagnosis of Downs.

I don’t think anything should change, legally, but she has every right to speak out. She does have a point, after all. But I think my right as a parent to choose a child free of disability overrides her argument. Opinions, both.

I hope women can find it in themselves to oppose the change in law. I know it is hard when a woman with down's wants the law changed, but it will chip away at women's rights and most people do support the distinction between disability and not in terms of our abortion rights. Our abortion law was very hard fought in the UK and any change is a political minefield.

If we start trying to change it now -0 eg we could change it to abortion on demand up to say 20 weeks in all cases without needing to prove anything about your mental state, not needing 2 doctors to certify etc etc even that would be hard to get passed.

All parents who want to abort the unborn where there is a disability always want the abortion as soon as they can but sometimes it is not spotted until quite late.

The problem is that you’re looking at a minority of cases for those who choose to abort over 24 weeks and and even smaller minority of those will be over 24 weeks simply because the mother felt like waiting, I’d wager the numbers of abortions carried out after 24 weeks purely because the woman felt like waiting are very very close to zero. There’s obviously routine screening which reduces the number of abortions after 24 weeks but the follow ups from that, amnios etc take time which may well take you over the “limit”. Then you have to account for those women who may not even discover they are pregnant until very late on or perhaps aren’t able or permitted to access maternity care until very much later.

I think abortion has to be available freely in order that all women can make a choice about their own body and their own life in their own time without a looming deadline or pressure from external sources. I suspect a change in the law would not have the effect this woman is hoping for. I expect that in situations where blood results are slow to be returned and the risk returned is a high one, that lots of possibly viable, healthy babies would be terminated simply because they didn’t have the time to wait for extra testing which would give them a definite answer. For a lot of women the high risk would be simply too much of a risk altogether. So no. The law shouldn’t be changed. I don’t think there’s anyone out there who would have a late term abortion for shits and giggles, I expect the vast majority, possibly even the entirety, are carried out for genuinely heartbreaking reasons.

What does a 24 year old with downs syndrome know about anything other than their own life and experiences?
She is clearly being used.
I am sure we all thought a lot of things when we were 24 that we don't think now.

Rabblemum, i totally agree. It was laughable that David Cameron thought he had common ground with every parent of a disabled child. Just having adequate housing makes a huge difference.

I don’t understand the arguments about bodily autonomy - because that isn’t the question. The question is should a woman’s right to bodily autonomy UP TO BIRTH be allowed only for disabled babies/foetuses or should this be brought into line with the rules for healthy babies. If you push the bodily autonomy argument then logically you would say that all women should have the right to abort all foetuses right up to birth. Maybe some think that but it’s not the mainstream view.

I personally think that yes, it should be brought into line with the timeline for other abortions. Possibly if a woman could prove she hadn’t known she was pregnant until after 24 weeks (ie no medical records of it) so wasn’t able to access normal scans to get disability results exceptions could be made. I also think exceptions should be made if doctors agreed the baby would die very soon after birth and had no chance of viability - although I can’t think how this wouldn’t have been spotted earlier. But for cases like Downs I find it hard to justify a post-viability abortion. Women could give it up for adoption. Plus I agree with above poster that a late abortion puts you through the birth process anyway, so there’s not significant differences for a woman birth-wise.

But people are allowed different opinions on this.

It would be better to campaign for more money and practical support for disabled children and adults, if you want to see more disabled people, and their families, having not just life but a good quality of life

A change in the law would not achieve what this 24 year old and the mother of the 2 year old are aiming for.

If abortion is stopped here there is nothing stopping those who can raise the money from going elsewhere in Europe to have one.

People have seemed to have forgotten that women from Ireland and NI until recently, and very recently in the latter case, came to England to have abortions. There were also many random strangers who helped women get abortion pills.

I have family and friends who work in different aspects of paediatrics. I discovered three of them had worked on a case of a teenager who had a baby with severe disabilities. The teenager had been advised to abort the baby but due to family pressure hadn't. By the baby's first birthday the baby was in care.

"After all, we don’t know what it’s like to live knowing that most parents would choose to get rid of people like her, and how that would make one feel."

Lots of us born to Single Women, disabled, teenage Mothers, born out of rape etc etc, do, so were would it end?

notalways, I agree the bodily autonomy point is not the best. The best is probably that abortion law changes are such a political nightmare in the UK that no politician with any sense will go near them as people have such strong views on all sides. However bodily autonomy is a bit of an argument - a woman may not want to give birth to a disabled child but might want to give birth to a child without disabilities just as she may not want to give birth to a rapist's child but would like her husband's.

Also as a society most people in the UK do want to abort babies with down's syndrome - a very high percentage choose to do so (most quite early one) and would not do that for a baby without disabilities so that reflects our cultural views. We tend not to want children with disabilities if we have a choice. Of couurse some parents are different - I remember reading two deaf parents writing that being deaf was superior and better and they hoped their child were deaf as they were.

@notalwaysalondoner
But for cases like Downs I find it hard to justify a post-viability abortion. Women could give it up for adoption.

This is completely ignorant and arrogant. Can only assume you have never been pregnant and know nothing about adoption!

notalwaysalondoner, because it's often at the 20 week scan, which as said can be at 21 weeks, organ damage isn't picked up. Or the extent of organ damage isn't picked up. Then you give the parents time to digest the news, get in touch with support, go for counselling, meet with consultants etc and that takes at least three weeks.

You might get the results back that your baby has downs at 13 weeks, but then further tests start and it's at 22 weeks that you find severe heart problems.

My daughter, unknown to me during pregnancy, was born with an absolutely awful condition. There was no test which could have detected her condition.

She was born absolutely broken, she lived for 2 weeks, every single second of her life was filled with pain and trauma. She was poked and prodded and had test upon test every day. Her brain was fully functioning, her litte body just wouldn't work, she couldn't breathe, or move, all she had in her tiny life was pain.

Holding my little girl as the tubes were removed was the most heartbreaking moment of my life, for me, but I was relieved for her, her suffering was over.

I got pregnant some time later, and when I was 5 months along (they had been running tests since her death and consulting with other hospitals around the world, as her condition was so rare it doesn't even have a name) I had a letter telling me that her condition may be genetic.

The only way I could know if my baby had the same condition was by having scans regularly, but I likely wouldn't know definitively until after 30 weeks.

I would 100% have had an abortion had my baby had the same condition as my daughter, I was very fortunate that my baby did not have the same condition.

Any 'pro lifer' who thinks they have some sort of moral superiority because of their views can, quite frankly, fuck right off.

If you had watched the way my poor daughter suffered, and thought inflicting that pain onto another child was better than having an abortion then you have no concern for the welfare of anyone.

Abortion should always be as early as possible, as late as necessary.

If you don't agree with abortions, don't have one.

Nobody should assume that their personal views and circumstances apply to everyone and use that to the detriment of other women. You don't see pro choicers forcing anyone to have an abortion, so why do 'pro lifers' want to force women to have babies?

Given the cleft lip and palette and club foot are also covered by this legislation it is well overdue an overhaul.

I very much doubt anyone is having a late term abortion for just these conditions. It’s far more likely they’re symptoms of a much more serious condition. I believe that cleft palate is also associated with heart abnormalities.

For those saying abortions for cleft palate are not happening, those 2018 stats state there were 11 late term abortions for just that. That is 11 viable babies whose lives were ended for a condition that generally can be resolved by surgery.
I really hate the argument ,' if you don't like it, don't do it' as this is a moral question not a personal one.
I also hate the argument that a civilised society is shown by people having personal autonomy as I think a civilised society looks out for its most vulnerable. The most vulnerable are those who have no voice and the unborn are top of that list.

I am pro-choice, even though I don't think that I personally could ever have an abortion.

It isn't just about choosing to continue a pregnancy, it's about choosing whether you can provide the lifelong support that the child and then adult may need.

I really hate the argument ,' if you don't like it, don't do it' as this is a moral question not a personal one

But surely denying a woman the chance to make choices about her own body is incredibly immoral.

but I cannot see that club foot, cleft lip, or Downs Syndrome are valid reasons to terminate

On their own they are not. This is a tactic used by anti abortion groups. They will look at a medical report of an abortion of a foetus with no brain, clef palete, club foot and bowl on the outside.

They then list those things as if they are a single reason.

DifficultPifcultLemonDifficult

Thankyou for sharing, I'm not going to offer platitudes, they wouldn't mean anything, I would not wish that on anyone.

BeforeIPutOnMyMakeup

I went to an RC school run my nuns. Giving birth is the only importnt bit, leaving a severly disabled child in hospital is considerd doing the right thing.

Cleft palate can mean almost the entire skull is split in half & is incompatible with life outside the womb. Be careful with that one...

The Times said that there were 2-3 abortions/yr for minor limb abnormalities in the period 1996-2004. It's not clear if those were the ONLY issues or just among the named issues. I just wonder how they found 2 doctors willing to sign off on such relatively small physical problems. Shouldn't we be even more concerned about doctors with such poor moral compasses?

Does anyone know how many later abortions are to save the mothers life? This must be a factor also.

We had a family member who had downs. We saw over the years the cuts in funding, the reduction in support. It had a direct effect on their health and well-being in the last few years of their life. Why aren’t they campaigning for that. It’s pro birth, not pro life if you don’t care for that life afterwards.
They had previously lived with their mother and then a sibling. Both of their healths were totally ruined caring for them. I think people need to spend time caring for someone with ‘low functioning’ downs before they have a right to comment. I know it gives DH the rage when they always trot out young people with downs who are able to pass GCSEs as a representation of what it’s like to have downs, it’s not. I think people are fine as long as someone else is caring for them, and it’s not them.
I do know someone who plans to take their downs sibling once her parents pass away, I can’t imagine she will have any life from that point, but she doesn’t want them to go into a failing care system.

I also hate the argument that a civilised society is shown by people having personal autonomy as I think a civilised society looks out for its most vulnerable. The most vulnerable are those who have no voice and the unborn are top of that list

At what gestation does this begin? The moment of conception? A few cells should have more rights than a woman? Or is it 16 weeks, or 20, or 24? In which case what magically happens overnight at that gestation?

Some of the most vulnerable people in our society are girls and women who are pregnant and don't want to be. Do we just toss a coin and decide whether the woman or the fetus is more vulnerable at that point?

I respect your right to your opinion, I also respect my right to find your opinion ridiculous.

I wont vote on this but - society, politics in this country means that support whether educational, work or care throughout adulthood is exceptional hard to get & less people are able to get adequate support especially when they become adults - many people become at extreme risk & this is only going to get worse - having a baby with potentially complex & a chance of life threatening disability (& you cant know before the baby is born how severe the disability will be) is something only a mother should choose because she is the one who will care & fight for her child & its a lifetime commitment -its easy to say have it & get it adopted but adoption for disabled dc is less likely &the pressure/grief on the birth parents would be immense. Whether I would or you would choose when we haven't gone through this - I would not judge. I could not judge. nor should anyone else.