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.

Being given a choice isn't being pressured.

I suspect that's what happened.

Down syndrome being potentially eradicated by testing and termination is a completely different issue but seems that may be what you're complaining about given your most recent posts.

I fully agree with you OP. This was subtle pressure being put in a person who had known all along of her child's disability and who had embraced it and was prepared for it. This is wrong plain and simple. I am also against termination at such advanced stages in pregnancy. Disability or no disability.

I think until you ve been through this decsion yourself and the heart break is causes you can't imagine the pain involved. It's women's choice. I fully support that.

this

Because I can't see how you think you're right? I can't even begin to engage with how you think it's impossible for a woman to be forced to have an abortion. But if you're going to be coy about the logic behind your claim, don't worry, I'll just assume there wasn't any.

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?

This isn’t how legal cases work.

She is suing the government because she believes the law which allows foetuses with disabilities to be aborted after 24 weeks is discriminatory. She will either win, in which case the law will be declared incompatible with human rights and the government will face pressure to change the law, or she will lose, and the law will be held to be compatible with human rights.

Her personal experiences will have nothing to do with the outcome of that case. The law isn’t going to change because she feels she was treated badly. The law may change if she can convince a court that the law is inherently discriminatory - that, regardless of how any one person is treated, it is fundamentally incompatible with human rights.

If she truly wants there to be a change in the way women carrying foetuses with Down’s syndrome are treated, she could be campaigning for that. But she isn’t. She has chosen instead to campaign for choices to be removed from other women, because she doesn’t agree with the choices some of them make.

Eradication of babies with Down’s Syndrome via testing and termination would be sad but understandable if it’s the mother’s choice. But many women do want to have babies with Down’s Syndrome and they shouldn’t face intense pressure to abort.

@bindibindi that’s not true. Down’s syndrome can cause severe health problems. About half will have a heart defect. More than half will develop issues with sight. More than half will have hearing issues. Children and adults with Down’s syndrome are also more at risk of getting ill. Life expectancy in developed countries for someone with Down’s syndrome tends to be under fifty. Then there are the learning difficulties which vary vastly. That’s not to say that they can’t have a good quality of life etc but it is most certainly not a mild condition.

I fully agree with you OP. This was subtle pressure being put in a person who had known all along of her child's disability and who had embraced it and was prepared for it. This is wrong plain and simple. I am also against termination at such advanced stages in pregnancy. Disability or no disability.

Thanks, this is what’s upsetting. The subtle pressure on a woman 34 weeks’ pregnant.

But many women do want to have babies with Down’s Syndrome and they shouldn’t face intense pressure to abort.

Do you really believe the solution to this is to prevent other women who do want abortions from having them?

I wonder if she will still feel the same when she is 75 and having to care for an adult with Down's? And worry about their future care when she is no longer alive or able to cope?

@zscaler you make good points and I understand this. But haven’t there been cases where people have sued to bring about change in other areas?

My dd was born missing an arm and I know of parents with similar children who were definitely put under pressure to abort-yes including late abortion-latest I've heard was around 36 weeks.
They were told it was very likely the child would have other severe conditions (reality is that is very rare), did they want the responsibility of bringing a severely disabled child into the world (reality is there's very little that can't do. In 16 years we haven't met anything yet), they wouldn't be able to cope etc.
So, yes, I can easily believe that she was pressurised.

Do you really believe the solution to this is to prevent other women who do want abortions from having them?

No, as mentioned baby times, I will always be pro-choice.

No, as mentioned baby times, I will always be pro-choice.

If you’re pro-choice then there is no way you can support this law suit.

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.

When I booked an elective csection for dc2, I was reminded multiple times I had the option to let nature take it's course. When I rocked up in labour ahead of the elective date, I was encouraged to wait and see. Discussing options is a good thing. Feeling for whatever reason you can't stand up to your doctors is another issue entirely.

My GP tried to push me into taking a drug I'm really not happy with (an antipsychotic at low dose for ptsd caused insomnia and heightened alertness). We discussed it. She encouraged and pushed pretty hard. I'm not taking it. I can't imagine reporting her for it.

I could understand a campaign to stop medical professionals using certain kinds of language but using the behaviour of one dr to try and take choices away from all women is abhorrent.

If you’re pro-choice then there is no way you can support this law suit.

I don’t support the lawsuit but I can understand if she had a bad experience and wants to highlight it. I’m not sure a campaign would get traction without a lawsuit.

My son was born with a genetic syndrome, which we didnt know about until he was born. If i outlive him (most likely) this progressive disease will cause a very painful end to his life. I he outlived me, well, i dont like to think about that either because he will never be independent any way. He is an amazing child, the best and most kind little boy. The endless hospital trips, therapy etc are costly and I struggle. He has had, and will continue to have many painful procedures over his short life. Had I been made aware of him having this syndrome, I feel ashamed to say I would of terminated the pregnancy, regardless of gestation. This is no life for any of us, but he will suffer the most, it's just so unfair. X

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?

You clearly don't have much experience of disability to make a statement like this. In many cases it is not mild at all, I've known people with downs syndrome who were unable to speak or care for themselves at all. Equally, some are able to work, build relationships and live relatively independent lives but it is not always the case.

I agree with her that abortion should never be 'encouraged', but I 100% do not support taking away the right to choose.

My dd was born missing an arm and I know of parents with similar children who were definitely put under pressure to abort-yes including late abortion-latest I've heard was around 36 weeks.
They were told it was very likely the child would have other severe conditions (reality is that is very rare), did they want the responsibility of bringing a severely disabled child into the world (reality is there's very little that can't do. In 16 years we haven't met anything yet), they wouldn't be able to cope etc.
So, yes, I can easily believe that she was pressurised.

I’m sorry you had to go through that @Witchend . Such pressure can happen and it shouldn’t.

It’s clear the current law is disablist and abortion to term or near term say 34 weeks should be permitted for any woman.

All women deserve accurate unbiased counselling when their foetus is likely to have a disability. The current counselling is often prejudiced, for example parents of infants with HLHS report pressure to continue the pregnancy while parents of infants with uncomplicated Down syndrome feel pressured to end it. Which child will have a worse quality of life? There is plenty of research that physicians underestimate the quality of life of people with learning disabilities and that they suffer discrimination and excess mortality in medical care.

Had I been made aware of him having this syndrome, I feel ashamed to say I would of terminated the pregnancy, regardless of gestation. This is no life for any of us, but he will suffer the most, it's just so unfair. X

@Mumtoawarrior I’m so sorry and I don’t think you need to feel ashamed at all

Lola

Absolutely, if you're going to present every pregnant woman with the same options. Many people don't see DS as a deficiency and don't want to be reminded that others see their unborn baby as a life to consider ending when other lives are just assumed to be going forward towards a live birth. Assuming women will be repeatedly wanting to hear a medic remind them (and it would be reminding, if the info has already been given) that they can still have the baby killed (post viability date!) is obviously going to be upsetting, unhelpful and confusing for some women, just as it would have been upsetting for a doctor to 'remind' me I could have my non-Downs baby aborted.

It's not about women's choices as much as an attitude to DS that is oppressive to parents who don't share that attitude-and there are many. I don't think it's a given that expectant parents of DS children will naturally wish to have it repeatedly raised in conversation that they have the medical option to kill a baby they may have bonded with and be preparing to meet the following month or week. They may react as any other expectant parent would - along the lines of :WTF, I have come here today to receive medical care for my baby and I!'

Perhaps a note could be made following the first conversation about whether or not the parent would like the issue to be raised again, and hospital policy be to proceed as they would for any other pregnancy if the woman wishes. Anything else is callous, shrewd manoeuvring based on a political agenda rather than simple decency and a medical commitment to preserve like, not play God.

The antenatal screening program is designed to enable women to have an informed choice . Some women whose babies are diagnosed prenatally with abnormalities continue with the pregnancy and some do not . The most important issue is the choice , women who end pregnancies for abnormality suffer enough with guilt, it is appropriate for anyone to add to that .

dinosaur

It's not really the same thing though... You and your HCP had a common premise and the options were on the basis of this. You might have felt quite differently if you were discussing an ELCS and he reminded you that he could perform an abortion instead. I find your post disingenuous.

Sorry I missed out a not - it is not appropriate for any one to add to their guilt