Mum of baby with Down's syndrome suing government over abortion law

[SharonasCorona]

The mother of a baby with Down's syndrome is suing the government for allowing disabled children to be aborted after 24 weeks of pregnancy.

After 24 weeks a woman can have an abortion if she is at risk of grave physical and mental injury, or there is a severe foetal abnormality, including Down's syndrome.

Maire Lea-Wilson says she was encouraged in hospital to abort her son, who is now 11 months old. She felt the assumption was "that you would want to abort a child with Down's syndrome".

I’m in pro-choice, but I didn’t realise you could abort disabled children until birth. It’s shocking that a woman with a healthy baby with Down’s Syndrome was encouraged to have an abortion, right up until she carried the baby full term.

It's not her place to try to remove choice from other women.
I would absolutely support her if her campaign was to stop professionals pressuring women to abort babies with down syndrome. But what she wants to do is deny women the choice and instead subject them to the forced birth of a child they feel ill equipped to care for and she has no right to do that.

Maire knew from the beginning her baby has Down’s Syndrome. Asking her at 34 weeks pregnant if she wants to abort and as she says, encouraging her ( the expectation is that she should want to abort) is not giving her choice, it’s putting pressure on her.

But none of that changes the fact that she still had the choice, she chose not to abort. She now wants to take that choice away from other women.

As far as I understand she doesn't want to stop medical professionals encouraging abortions after 24 weeks, she wants to make abortions after 24 weeks illegal. They are totally different things.

Then her response should be a complaint against the individual members of staff that she encountered, not a court case to remove the choices of every pregnant woman

Complaining about individuals doesn’t address what may be happening on a national level.

Being"reminded" you have the option to abort is a subtle form of pressure and I think it's right there should be discussion about it.
Presenting women with their medical options throughout their care is enabling them to have the choice.

You could easily have the flip side where someone doesn't have all the options presented, goes on to give birth and then class they weren't able to make an informed decision because the health care providers pushed them into giving birth.

But none of that changes the fact that she still had the choice, she chose not to abort. She now wants to take that choice away from other women.

Would you say the same to women in Northern Ireland who can’t have an abortion? After all, they have the ‘choice’ to travel to Liverpool, right?

Down's syndrome shouldn't be encouraged as I would class it as a mild disability, physically and intellectually (I read this) and it poses no harm for mother and baby at birth, so I don't understand why its pushed for termination?

DS, like many disabilities, is a spectrum condition and even a "mild" disability is still a disability. It is impossible to say exactly how a child will be affected until after birth and some effects may not become clear until many years down the line.

As a parent of two disabled children, it is not a life that should be forced onto anyone. I love my children dearly but it does impact upon us as a family, the future is a worrying prospect rather than something hopeful, and it is mentally (and often physically) exhausting balancing it all.

A choice exists, that choice is for the woman involved and is no business of anyone else.

I wonder why people always want to decide for others when it comes to abortion.
If you're against abortion then don't undergo one yourself but stop trying to force your morals upon others. I believe that any woman who chooses abortion does this because she has her reasons and she doesn't need to justify them to anyone else.

I’m pro choice, but I disagree with her. She chose to carry on her pregnancy, entirely up to her. However, another woman may choose to abort. Again entirely up that woman. Just because she chose to carry on doesn’t mean that the choice to abort shout be taken away for others.

I think that reminding women of their options throughout their pregnancy is the very definition of choice. This woman is massively projecting her own emotions because she was adamant she didn't want to abort.

If she is going to campaign, she should campaign for a policy that says that if a woman explicitly states that she is sure that she does not want to abort after 24 weeks, this can be written on her notes and an HCP should no longer discuss it with her. Or something along those lines.

Not make it illegal altogether to abort.

But she wasn't forced to, was she? Because baby is now 11 months. Being told/reminded of all your options isn't the same as encouraging.

Some things (for all manner of reasons) CAN be missed in early pregnancy & only picked up at later gestations, that's why we have the options we have do, one person shouldn't be able to take away that right from all women.

Very few abortions take place after 24 weeks 0.01% (289) in 2018 source

Was she actually encouraged to abort, or just given the option? Because this sounds a lot like a woman trying to stop other women from having options because she doesn’t personally agree with the choice they might make.

Of course presenting options is the definition of choice, but this woman says she was ‘under intense pressure’ when she was ‘scared and vulnerable’. Which is it choice but almost coercion.

Lots of people seem keen to dismiss her as ‘over-reacting’, but I think this should be investigated.

.”She felt the assumption was "that you would want to abort a child with Down's syndrome". -I would like to know what exactly has been said , perception and interpretation differs from person to person .

Which is why the case should go to court so evidence can be assessed.

Complaining about individuals doesn’t address what may be happening on a national level.

But limiting the choices of other women does? Why should those other women be punished for this?

FYI making abortions post-24wks illegal won't stop them from happening, it'll simply mean that they happen in unsafe risky conditions and then we end up with dead women.

If people like this woman want to encourage people to continue a pregnancy where the child is known to have disabilities then forcing women to continue to the pregnancy is not the answer. They should be campaigning for viable alternatives such as:

• a properly funded social care system
• fit for purpose respite care
• Carers' Allowance at a rate that actually reflects the work and sacrifice involved
• additional employment rights for parents of disabled children such as paid care leave
• protected employment rights for disabled people
• streamlining of the EHCP process and proper SEN support and funding for schools
• the removal of systematic barriers that prevent disabled people from access the same privileges as non-disabled people

But she won't campaign for that because it's far easier to push the onus onto women to continue the pregnancy and then raise a disabled child in a society that does little to value such families.

Then let it be investigated - let the actions of her health care providers be scrutinised to see if they behaved inappropriately and put pressure on her which she shouldn’t have faced.

But don’t seek to have the law changed so that women who do want abortions have their choices limited. That is a completely inappropriate response.

But limiting the choices of other women does? Why should those other women be punished for this?

I never said this, I will always be pro choice, which is why I think a woman being out under ‘intense pressure’ is upsetting.

But don’t seek to have the law changed so that women who do want abortions have their choices limited. That is a completely inappropriate response.

It may be a way of trying to get attention to the issue?

Which is why the case should go to court so evidence can be assessed.

I think you’re confusing matters, OP. This court case isn’t going to be about whether she personally faced undue pressure to have an abortion. It’s about the fundamental question of whether women should be allowed to have abortions on the grounds of disability. It’s not an investigation into the care she received or the support she was given. It’s an ideological war on access to abortion.

If this woman was pressured to abort when she didn’t want to then there may have been failings in the specific care she received. But why should that mean another woman is prevented from having an abortion when she has no desire to carry the pregnancy to term?

It may be a way of trying to get attention to the issue

In which case the ends do not justify the means. What right does she have to endanger the choices of other women to draw attention to her own personal circumstances? If that’s what she’s doing, it’s even worse than if it’s a cause she truly believes in.

This court case isn’t going to be about whether she personally faced undue pressure to have an abortion

But wouldn’t her personal experience form a part of this? Isn’t is it possible these could lead to changes in which women carrying babies with Down’s Syndrome are treated?

sorry why sue the government and not the person who suggested it to her

I'm not getting this. She feels she was pressured to abort so wants to remove the choice to abort from other women?

Lots of anti choice bullshit around at the moment. This is more of it. She is BU.

I suspect this woman’s experience is not unique. There was a documentary a couple of years ago on how there will be no babies with Down’s Syndrome in the near future.

Then her response should be a complaint against the individual members of staff that she encountered, not a court case to remove the choices of every pregnant woman

@KKSlider spot on.