Today's ruling re Down's Syndrome

[Shirazboobaloo]

Sorry to hijack AIBU for this but can someone explain this ruling to me please?

What I can't understand (from press reports) is how this has "come to this".

Who is Heidi Crowther and who are those supporting her?

I am genuinely confused but don't know where to ask

@Aberteifi

I am so angry at posters who think of me and others like me who are called murderers for tfmr after 24 weeks. You have no idea what pain we have been through we did not terminate our pregnancies for fun. I wanted my son it wasn't a case of not wanting to raise him it was that i didn't want to see him suffer and struggle until he died from the condition he had. Until you have walked in our shoes i actually don't give a damn on your opinion but there are families who do care and they don't need to be hurt by mindless people who actually don't give a damn who they hurt.

Yes 👏👏👏

@Teapiggies

But then you can't test for other disabilities in utero and not everyone gives up their baby as soon as they learn they have a disability.

I don’t understand this argument. Because some conditions can’t be detected prenatally, we shouldn’t (or should be discouraged from) testing for conditions that can?

The argument by a pp ages ago was, what happens to the babies whose mums don't want them when they are born with DS if they cannot be aborted at almost full term? Where are all the people who want to adopt them?

My response was that babies will be born every day with disabilities that their parents would not have known about and they don't all suddenly hand them over to live in care.

I'm not anti screening at all, but I do not really think the argument that all the DS babies will end up in care if they can't be aborted, really rings true for me.

@cloudacious

pointy If you really think that then I suppose you would raise no objections to a society that sanctioned the ending of an unborn life even moments from birth, since the points you raise relate to the choice remaining entirely with the pregnant woman. I disagree with your view.

I don't know about pointythings but I wouldn't raise any objections to that. In reality even if you could abort right up until the minute before birth for absolutely no reason no one is going to be doing that so it's a pretty pointless argument.

My response was that babies will be born every day with disabilities that their parents would not have known about and they don't all suddenly hand them over to live in care.

No because they’re an actual live, born child whose parents form an attachment to.

Of course it’s different emotionally to a fetus of 13 or 14 weeks gestation.

It’s a bit like saying women should go through with every pregnancy they have because they probably wouldn’t discard the baby once it was born, even if their circumstances are very unsuitable.

It just doesn’t work that way.

I have a question for pro-life advocates: Should biological mothers be legally required to give blood to their children if it would save their lives? Should fathers? Why or why not?

Are pro-choice people fine with aborting a 37 month old foetus??

Yes. I'm pro choice and am fine with terminating a 37 week old foetus. HTH.

''Just because of DS''. Posters are still saying it. It's ''just'' DS. Really?

Wouldn't you think, if you were going to come onto a thread where women are writing in detail about the most awful life choices they've had to make - baring their souls about things they've had to go through - that you'd educate yourself a bit instead of taking the risk of typing out crass shite. Because, you know, actually you have no fucking idea.

The thread it's self IS an education. So they're obviously not bothered to read it. If you didn't already know that DS is not a ''learning disability'', you'd have found out by reading the thread.

I almost envy these posters. They've naivety must be wonderful. What a happy fluffy world they live in. ''Oooh you're all murderers you mums who kill their babies'' - then they go back to their cup of tea and their copy of Take A Break ...

@Pitapotamus

There seems to be a misconception about Down’s syndrome, as if it is some kind of terrible thing whereas in reality it’s fine. People who happen to have Down’s syndrome are usually capable of living full and happy lives (just like people who happen to not have Down’s syndrome are ‘usually’ capable of living full and happy lives.

The ruling is discrimination, plain and simple. There is a different rule for babies with Down’s syndrome and babies without. How can that not be discrimination.

what do you base this SWEEPING statement on? In reality, as has been said, the people with DS who can live "full and happy" lives are a small percentage of all those born with DS....add in "full, happy and independent" or even asisted living instead of managed living and the percentage becomes less. If you don't know what you are talking about the keep quiet until you do!

@cloudacious

pointy If you really think that then I suppose you would raise no objections to a society that sanctioned the ending of an unborn life even moments from birth, since the points you raise relate to the choice remaining entirely with the pregnant woman. I disagree with your view.

That is the extreme end point of my argument, but we both know in practice that no woman would choose to terminate at the very end of pregnancy on a whim. She will do so because there is a very compelling reason to do so. Or do we both know that? Do you perhaps believe that women can't be trusted to make good decisions and will decide, in droves, to not have a baby while they are mid-labour?

The fact that you speak of 'unborn life' says a lot about your position.

@Pitapotamus

There seems to be a misconception about Down’s syndrome, as if it is some kind of terrible thing whereas in reality it’s fine. People who happen to have Down’s syndrome are usually capable of living full and happy lives (just like people who happen to not have Down’s syndrome are ‘usually’ capable of living full and happy lives.

The ruling is discrimination, plain and simple. There is a different rule for babies with Down’s syndrome and babies without. How can that not be discrimination.

You seem to be under the misconception that Down’s syndrome is not a vast scale with many and varied issues.

You have some people who live full and happy lives. You also have ones like my DD who has a large number of co-morbidities, lives in constant pain, will never have a “full or happy life” and who would, in brutal honesty have been better off if I’d been able to go through with that termination.

Which I would have done had the cow doing my scan not - deliberately after being asked not to - turned through screen to me so see her again.

People need to stop interfering in the decisions that women make for their pregnancies.

@cloudacious

This is going to sound horrible but, as with many disabilities, the general public only see the "acceptable" ones on the media.

It sounds horrible because it is horrible. Every DS person is acceptable. If you don't think so, it's your problem and no wonder you haven't seen them with people like you in the world.

@cloudacious Did you actually read my post? I said "IN THE MEDIA" I said "the general public" and I used "" round the word acceptable. I spent all of my working life (NHS) working for and supporting the concept of independence and acceptance of all people with disabilities but I can tell you from what i have seen and know that you don't know the half of it. and the half you don't know are things I would not wish on anybody.

I am pretty gobsmacked by the number of naive and uninformed people on this thread.....but I guess if you haven't been there you believe what the media tells you.

A question for the prolifers.
When a disabled baby is born, would you hook it up to life support? At what point do you switch the machine off?

What's the difference between switching of life support regardless of the age of the person and abortion?

@RobertaFirmino

Are pro-choice people fine with aborting a 37 month old foetus??

Yes. I'm pro choice and am fine with terminating a 37 week old foetus. HTH.

I would also. I'm pro choice. There's not restrictions on that.

@Lockdownbear

A question for the prolifers. When a disabled baby is born, would you hook it up to life support? At what point do you switch the machine off?

What's the difference between switching of life support regardless of the age of the person and abortion?

Sorry I don't have an answer but I don't think anyone here qualifies as pro life. I think most are pro choice, but are just uncomfortable with abortion till birth theoretically

Like if someone believes in the death penalty for murder but not rape, they still believe in the death penalty even if not for every crime.

So if someone supports DS terminations being limited to 24w they can technically still be PC

@Lockdownbear if there was a high likelihood of a child never having a decent quality of life - then yes, I would! At any age. if the person can’t give consent we have to make a guess of their best interest

@Lockdownbear

A question for the prolifers. When a disabled baby is born, would you hook it up to life support? At what point do you switch the machine off?

What's the difference between switching of life support regardless of the age of the person and abortion?

You're being very disingenuous here. I'm not sure hata point your trying to make but it's not comparable.

If a child is born with a disability where they need to be hooked up to a machine to breathe that process will be guided by medical professionals who will treat the child to the best of their abilities.

An unborn child is not the same as one which has been born. It's a nonsensical comparison.

I have very strong and personal feelings about this law
In that I hate it
Always have done

I’m pro choice , and I’ve had an abortion

But morally I’ve never liked this law and I salute this young woman for trying

Even as a younger pregnant women I was shocked that this option was available

I don't think anyone here qualifies as pro life.

You haven't been reading properly. It's not many but they are there

If you use the word but after saying your pro choice your not

@Brefugee

I don't think anyone here qualifies as pro life.

You haven't been reading properly. It's not many but they are there

99% of people who wanted the law chance say they’re ‘pro choice’, when they’re not. They’re pro choice when that choice is one they personally feel is morally right or benefits them on some level. Not the same thing.

*changed

@Brefugee

I don't think anyone here qualifies as pro life.

You haven't been reading properly. It's not many but they are there

Then nobody is good enough to be pro choice, if the criteria is abortion til birth in any scenario for any reason

So if you believe in the current law which prohibits most abortions after 24w, you're pro-life? I don't get the gate keeping and hyperbole, nobody here is pro life.

The current law is a pro life law?

The only way to stop the 24 week ruling being attacked by disability campaigners is to do away with it altogether.

No women are going to terminate because they've had a change of heart at 30 weeks but it would stop those women who have had to make the heart-breaking decision to TFMR being attacked and questioned at what must be a dreadful time.

@Aberteifi

If you use the word but after saying your pro choice your not

Why aren't you campaigning for the law to be changed then because at the moment, as it stands, there is a fairly big 'but'?