Disability And Abortion: The Hardest Choice CHANNEL 4

[Wouldloveanother]

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11155443/DOMINIC-LAWSON-Doctors-stop-pushing-mothers-aborting-disabled-babies.html

I’m planning on watching this in the next few days, but I’m getting increasingly concerned about the amount of anti-choice activity going on under the guise of ‘disability equality’.

The fight for care is exhausting. We are only now, with my son at 8 years old, accessing the care and support he deserves, as we now have a disability specific social worker and a directory payment package for respite hours. That support unlocked a lot of other things - free summer school with 1-1 assistance, blue badge application supporting statements etc etc. It took me two years of fighting to get that help, and three rejections, and I did give up at times, and have to come back to it all after a break. In the end it's finally paid off, and as his social worker said to me recently 'His involvement with us will increase as he gets older, rather than decrease, so it's good we have him in our books now'.

I also had to take our LA to tribunal for his school place.

My son needs 1-1 care at all times, as like a PP said he's like a toddler in a bigger child's body (no impulse control, v little danger awareness, sensory seeking by mouthing things etc etc). And it's exhausting. But I swear I would still have him all over again even if I knew what I was getting into. I can't imagine life without him, the idea leaves me cold.

I think I remember Dominic Lawson campaigning against a minimum wage in catering for under 21 year olds, the reason being that his daughter was currently employed ( in a sheltered way) in a local pub for a small wage. They couldn’t pay her the full MW because she was not doing a full job. It would be illegal to employ her for less, or for nothing.

I have every sympathy for anyone trying to do their best for their child, but not at the expense of everyone else’s child. Lawson just wants to alter law for his personal perceived benefit.

I always think to parents screw what society thinks say you can't cope and will put them into care (even if you don't mean it). SS don't pull their fingers out until parents are at breaking point.

But neither testing nor termination are compulsory. Many women reject both. Other women know their limitations and what they can cope with. It is they, not society, that will have the bulk of caring responsibility.

They really don't. They just assume you're all ticking along fine. Then when they finally come to assess you (because you have threatened them with the law about 50 times) they see that DH is in recovery from alcoholism because the last few years were so stressful, and that Mum's mind and body are gradually falling to bits. And that DC is actually disabled, and needs a lot of help to do everything, and suddenly somehow IS eligible for extra support/direct payments/respite etc, when three months ago they were bending over backwards to tell you they weren't disabled enough.

But as I said before, I would do it all again because my DS is my shining beacon of loveliness in a sea of bureaucratic bullshit.

I'd fight tooth and nail for my existing DC (and I do on a regular basis) but if I was to get pregnant again I'd have an abortion as quickly as possible because I'm at my capacity for how much care I can give a(nother) disabled child.

It won't because scans still happen and social pressure is still against disability.

And I think it's absolutely fair to say that. And 100% your right.

I am pro choice, even when it comes to disability, but I share my story about my DS because I know he wouldn't exist if doctors had pushed an abortion at me, knowing myself and the sort of person I was before he was here. The choice should exist. But maybe the way that disability and options thereafter are discussed by obstetricians and their staff needs a rethink.

@unicormb but there’s a difference between a theoretical, non-born child and knowing and loving the one that you have. For example I aborted as a teen due to my age and how it would limit my life. I’m sure if I’d gone through with the pregnancy I would’ve loved the child, and not have wished retrospectively that I’d aborted, if that makes sense.

Yes well how lovely for them. Proves nothing. If you really want balance, lets have less of the success narrative.

Yes I agree, if he didn't exist it would be a different story. But I am very easily led (thanks autism) and if a doctor repeatedly offered me an abortion I would probably think I had to take it.

Many people tell teens just that

Have you not seen the posts on the millions of 'help my 16yo DD is pregnant' posts that pop up all the time on chat, 30 days only, Teenagers and relationships

I hope if her child is in mainstream school they will be one of the few capable of living fully independently in society, however if not, I wonder what her opinion will be when she is in her late 70s like my Aunt and uncle, facing leaving behind a disabled adult child that never has and never will be independent.

No one tells a pregnant teenager their life will be horrendous and not worth living if they give birth

Jesus, they told us this every day at my school. I suppose they have Teen Mom and such to do the job now.

Some people have a very exaggerated idea of what disorders can be screened for.

You are fine with making abortion legal for autism, partial deafness or visual impairments?

But you can't diagnose any of these conditions prenatally! So the topic or abortion for them doesn't even come up.

Conditions that can be diagnosed prenatally include Down syndrome and other trisomies; spina bifida; and certain severe brain, heart and lung, and skeletal disorders.

It is also possible to do DNA testing for certain single-gene genetic disorders such as Tay-Sachs and cystic fibrosis. These tests are somewhat invasive, so are usually only done if there is reason to think that the child would be at unusual risk for these disorders; e.g. both parents are carriers.

It's not simply about screening.
There will be parents who have an existing child diagnosed with a debilitating condition such as severe ASD, whilst pregnant with their next child, who may choose to abort due to the lifelong caring responsibilites of the exisiting child they have suddenly had thrown at them and the potential heritability of some of these conditions, the timings in these situations may be far from ideal. Therefore as previously stated I am okay with abortion up to term, as I trust the Mother who is carrying the baby to be the best person to make these difficult and often heartbreaking decisions.

Gingercake2018 if the baby is near full term it has to be birthed dead or alive regardless so why the need to poison the baby in uterine? The baby can just be induced and given up for adoption if it’s not wanted. I get the pro choice argument about deciding to end a pregnancy but I don’t see why it’s pro choice to decide to poison a baby that would be born alive and perfectly healthy full term just because the mother doesn’t want the child to exist. That’s sick imo.

Do you know how many children are currently in care?

I can’t imagine Johnny Government telling obstetricians theyre legally obliged to agree to perform abortions at 40 weeks on any foetus. How many would do so if the fetid was considered viable post-birth?

I think the rules should be the same for all - but include a woman’s right to have birth induced at any time from 20-something weeks, with the likelihood that the resulting infant would be adopted if it survives. Before that point an abortion. Obviously it’s a massively imperfect situation but I genuinely cannot imagine how we can expect a doctor to end the heartbeat of a 40-week old feotus that would have otherwise survived after birth.

There are already doctors that perform late term abortions.

That you can’t imagine it doesn’t mean that there aren’t doctors willing to provide it as an option.

... but how many children in the care system have been there from birth? Without wanting to be brutal, most would prefer to adopt a very young baby than a 10-year-old.

Annieisalright children in care tend to be older ones, everyone wants to adopt a baby.

But prenatal surgery is also an option, for example repairing the baby's spinal cord in the womb then the pregnancy continues to full-term.

Yes, but generally not disabled ones. That’s aside from the fact it isn’t the duty of women to give birth to children they don’t want in order to meet demand.

Not everyone does want to adopt a baby

Also the process for adopting a baby requires people to be foster carers first whilst going through the process to adopt

If you think actively putting a child through the stress and attachment destroying process of adoption from birth is a preferable option you have a screw loose