To be glad that the Down Syndrome abortion appeal was defeated

[Fififafa]

A woman with DS has twice tried and failed to get the courts to outlaw abortion beyond 24 weeks for foetuses with DS. Under current legislation for England, Wales and Scotland, there is a 24-week time limit for abortion, unless "there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped", which includes Down's syndrome.
I read that she has is being supported by some religious group.

I’m glad that the appeal was lost. This is a personal decision that every woman has the choice and the right to make. What Heidi Crowter et al are doing, is fighting to remove that choice from women. AIBU?

This also seems like a bit of a strawman argument. It's true that a lot of anti abortion people (usually conservatives) are very hypocritical about how inconsistent they are with not caring about babies once they are born. That's not how everyone feels by a long shot. Many people who are against abortion also fully support welfare setups to support people, including long term support. It's actually a logical fallacy to try and prove people wrong by calling them a hypocrite. In the case of abortion, some anti abortion conservatives may be inconsistent, but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

You know a woman. How exciting for you.

Silly response. I also AM a woman. Not even a religious one.

You ARE a woman. Thrilling! And you have a mother and an aunt. Such fascinating stuff.

Reported for personal attacks :)

I said late term, if you read properly.

However I'm so happy that the woman you know was able to access abortions as and when she needed them, and for whatever reason she needed them, including convenience.

And I'm glad, despite your views, that she chose to tell you all of the details, as so often happens to forced birthers, it's so weird how many of you know women who just couldn't be bothered using contraception and have a lot of abortions in a short space of time.

oh diddums!

what a child.

Are you accusing me of lying? Because it's 100% true. It just comes off that you're seething because you don't have much of an argument beyond repeatedly insisting that abortion is fine. That's your opinion, not a fact.

I also asked, how do people here claim to support bodily autonomy when some of them want to prevent adults from taking hormones or getting surgery? Where does bodily autonomy begin and end exaclty?

I put yabu because i dont think fundamentally there shoild be a difference between the time limit to abort a baby with disabilities than a baby without. It plays into the narrative that disabled babies are worth less/deserve less protection. I am however not pro-life and believe women should have the right to choose termination to term/viability regardless os "ability" of child.

You're the one being a child. You hear opinions you don't like and make ridiculous comments.

I'll leave you to it then, you sensitive little petal

My love to your mummy and auntie xx

I believe you're the sensitive one getting all heated because someone dares to say something you disagree with, hon :)

reported for personal attack!

'Seething' 🤣

Abortion is absolutely fine, the law states as much.

You're the one with the opinion you want to inflict onto others.

You probably are lying, most of your lot do, to whip up some moral frenzy about women having sex and accessing health care of they need it.

Not sure why you seem to be mixing up late term abortions for health reasons and early abortions for other reasons though. Unless you just wanted to tell us about your definitely real pal.

I never made any specifications about late term abortions, where did I say that? I don't think abortion is bad if the baby is already dead or there is some extreme issue where it's not going to survive. That's not all this thread is about, it's also about aborting a baby just because it has DS. That is indeed bigoted. And please spare using the law as an example of morality. In some countries killing people for being gay is legal, that doesn't make it right. Terrible argument.

You also ignored my second paragraph about how some of the people here DO enforce their will on others.

What's also all the more evident of your hostility is that you and other people here have attacked me even though I never said I think abortion should be banned. You really know nothing about me other than the fact I think abortion is unethical and, in some cases, prejudiced, which it is. But that alone is enough for you to get your knickers in a twist and even suggest I'm a liar, You are firmly in the wrong sweety :)

I cannot be arsed getting into a debate about trans folk with you tbh. Adults can make their own choices about their own bodies and that's that.

Terminating a pregnancy is absolutely fine, whether it's because you can't deal with a baby, don't want to be tied to the father, whether it's for health reasons, whether you feel like you can't cope for any reason.

What's abhorrent is trying to force someone to keep a pregnancy they don't want, and then look after a child they can't cope with, or put the child into a system full of abuse, neglect and lack of funding.

Seriously, what business is it of yours if I decide I can't cope with a baby and terminate the pregnancy? It's not bigoted to make a choice in your own life about what you can cope with.

Your "just because it has DS comment" shows how little you actually know about DS as well.

As for the "other countries kill gay people" - I don't live in those countries, I live in the UK and am talking about UK laws, clearly. You lot always take things to the most extreme place possible though because you just sound like twats saying "I don't like women having autonomy over their own bodies, I don't trust them to make the right decisions for themselves".

Good job I don't really give a fuck about your opinion then, isn't it.

Enjoy ranting at yourself 😊

"Your "just because it has DS comment" shows how little you actually know about DS as well."

Are you assuming that anyone who has DS is some extreme and unmanageable situation? Making negative and general assumptions about people based on a characteristic is exactly what bigotry is, be it disability, sex, race, sexuality etc.

There's a big difference between not wanting a baby, and not being able to deal with one. If you've already decided you can't cope with something, anything, then you won't. But that's a your choice. There's a difference between can't and won't. Obviously you can have an abortion if you can't be bothered to deal with a child. That's still wrong though. Simple :)

"I don't live in those countries, I live in the UK and am talking about UK laws, clearly."

I gave that example to refute your argument. Laws and ethics are not the same thing. Many laws are wrong. Abortion might be legal, it's also still unethical

Last but not least, I haven't been ranting, unless you think longer, more well thought out responses automatically equates to ranting? You on the other hand ARE ranting since you accused me again of trying to stop people doing what they want with their bodies, when I already referred to you that I haven't actually said that. I think you're too agitated that you ignored it...again :)

so fucking what?

I can see both sides. As early as possible, as late as necessary - yes. That decision is heartbreaking and is not my place to judge.

However - society is deeply ableist and I question the value judgments on disabled children being "less than" other children to the point of enshrining to-term abortion for them separately from any other consideration. I understand how offensive that is to the DS community in particular, which is often singled out just because it's easy to test for. In some ways abortion for DS and other health related conditions that are not fatal is a form of eugenics. You're not allowed to abort to term based on sex-selection, why should other protected characteristics be any different?

Yes, disabled children require a LOT. But disability can happen at any stage for multiple reasons. My nephew's significant congenital disability was not able to be tested in utero, it was picked up at seven months old. My uncle was brain-damaged during birth, picked up at four months old. A friend's child has juvenile Parkinsons and went from being a healthy 6yr old to wheelchair bound and unable to speak in a matter of weeks. Another young man we know was in a car crash at 17 which caused brain damage leaving him forever at the capacity of a 13yr old.

I wonder - if you are not prepared to look after a child NO MATTER WHAT - whether you should be having children at all. What happens if your perfect, normal child suddenly is not perfect or normal anymore? Life itself is risk. Car crashes and other accidents, underlying heart conditions, mental health diagnoses, learning disabilities, neurodivergence, childhood cancers etc - a perfect healthy child is not a guarantee nor should it be the reason you conceive or continue a pregnancy. And I'm surprised by people who seem to think a normal fetus in-utero guarantees them a normal, easy, abled life for them and their child. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I am glad women can access abortion. Even if just for "convenience" as some PP said. I am totally pro choice and personally I would extend the abortion laws and make it easier for women to get abortions in any circumstances. I would abort a DS baby, I have 4 other children and I wouldn't want to have to cope with a 5th child let alone one with such complex needs. If I am frank, the fact that some DS people go on to win Olympic medals or be CEOs or whatever still doesn't make me want to have a DS child myself. I fully support people who would make the other choice though.

I wonder - if you are not prepared to look after a child NO MATTER WHAT - whether you should be having children at all. What happens if your perfect, normal child suddenly is not perfect or normal anymore? Life itself is risk. Car crashes and other accidents, underlying heart conditions, mental health diagnoses, learning disabilities, neurodivergence, childhood cancers etc - a perfect healthy child is not a guarantee nor should it be the reason you conceive or continue a pregnancy. And I'm surprised by people who seem to think a normal fetus in-utero guarantees them a normal, easy, abled life for them and their child. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It's not about convenience, or not wanting to look after them, that sounds so reductive and disingenuous to what it actually is to experience the horror of finding out your precious baby is ill.

It's about trying to reduce the harm, physical pain and suffering that your baby will experience. You know they will, because the doctors and HCP are very clear about their prognosis. They have to give you best case and worst case, but they can't guarantee anything.

I couldn't watch my babies suffer, fade away and die. Or rather, I had to do it before they were sentient, before their neuro-receptors could feel or process pain.

ND, from my POV, is very very different to needing all of the very intrusive and physical interventions and operations that my poorly children would have needed. Which may not have prolonged their lives. Which may not have improved their lives. And would not have stopped me having to plan their funerals.

I totally agree. I can't imagine having a baby and knowing I was going to have to struggle to meet their needs, while they suffered and eventually I would have to plan their funeral. That's no life for the baby, my other children or us a parents. If other people choose that path, then I would support them, but it isn't the path for me.