To think that maybe people should be a little more thoughtful before posting hurtful comments about children with special needs/disabilities.

[wrinklytum]

Grr.

Had a bad day and maybe a little oversensitive.

First and foremost,they are children.

And they are loved.

Yes my post was about abortin and the influence that has the view of the validity of disabled peoples rights and life quality, amd not euthanisia.

The views about euthanasia I just presumed were off the cuff (and crass)'it woud be better...' type comments represntative of the 'no importance to thier life' view, and not seriously a suggestion.

surely not??

tbh my reasoning about euthanasia can be applied to late abortions too.

Lavenders, I couldn't disagree more that the message is inherent that we don't accept SN because some people terminate because of SN. I think there are many reasons that people cannot have SN children, they may be a lone parent without support who would find a baby difficult without special needs and having one that required a massive amount of care would be too much, it could be part of a large family where there would not the time to look after it, it could be that the mother feels the rest of her family is going to suffer whilst she spends most of her day caring for one child.... now they may not be valid to you, but that's not really the point.

Helped out at our pre-school this morning and we have an SN little boy and he spent most of the morning "doing his own thing" but really enjoyed playing with the other children and when he had enough he would have a lie down in the quiet room.
Most of the time you think that he is not taking anything in, but he remembered where i had put the dustpan and brush.
And at the end of the session he gave me a great big kiss and a hug.
Made my day

I agree totally with this post Wannabe -

I do not think that a disabled baby should be allowed to be terminated past 24 weeks. I don't see why disability makes that life less worthwhile than that of a non disabled fetus, and by stating that pregnancies with disabled babies can be terminated up till term just reiterates that the life of a disabled baby is considered less worthwhile than that of a non disabled one.

I'm shocked by the comments as well, both on the abortion and euthanasia issues. I understand I might be in the minority as a pro-lifer, but I don't see how it is acceptable for a mother to terminate (I hesitate to use the word kill as I know I would be jumped on) her baby at 24 weeks gestation, while another mother might be battling to save her baby of the same age.

Do many pro choice people think we should be able to terminate up to 24 weeks? I think if a woman chooses to terminate at all after a 20 week scan then it should be swift.

I think even 20 weeks is too far. At 12 weeks, a foetus is fully formed and just needs to grow. It is a recognisable person, not a bundle of cells. I understand the viewpoint that termination before 12 weeks is not always viable because of waiting time, but surely something should be done to improve this?

yes ttt, but what if she didn't want that child? Unfortunately some abnormalities are not detected early on (this is uncommon though) so the woman might not have had the option of being offered a termination earlier.

So what would you say to that woman?

Do you really think it's right to force a woman to have a baby she doesn't want?

FWIW, I'm pro keeping the 24 week limit as it is.

Not all 20 week scans take place bang on 20 weeks.
And this is the sort of decision you don't want to have to make in a hurry. Imagine finding out something is wrong with your baby and someone saying 'now you need to decide whether to terminate, and you need to tell us RIGHT NOW or your choice is taken away'

And medical science agrees that babies are not developed enough neurologically to feel pain until 26 weeks at the earliest.

As for survival for babies born at 24 weeks - it's a tiny percentage who do survive, and only with huge amounts of intervention.

Besides, people seem to think that there are stacks of late terminations going on all the time with careless mothers not being bothered to go to the doctor in time - it actually amounts to 1.75% of all terminations, and usually people in really dire, distressing circumstances.

So that's my piece, and now I'm off.

Last night I asked my DP how anyone in the medical profession in this day and age can think it is acceptable for a women to be offered a termination on the grounds that her child will have Down's syndrome? I find it hard to get my head around it sometimes. A baby born with DS has absolutley every chance to grow up and attend mainstream schhol, maybe pass GCSE's, get a job, live independently, marry and have a happy fullfilled life. Why is it that it's ok to abort this child just becasue they hace an extra chromose that means they will have to have a some support to get through life, but get through life they will, and better than a lot of people with no SN's!

But that's my point tiredlady - why should the termination suddenly be alright because the foetus has an "abnormality"? I think it's wrong to value a disabled child any less than a supposedly "normal" child. We have created a culture where it's suddenly ok to pick and choose the type of child you want, and I think that's unhealthy. IMO, screening gives you the chance to prepare yourself if you are going to have a child with special needs, and might offer you the opportunity for the foetus to receive treatment in the womb. I dislike the way it can be used as a selection test.

tiredlady it is not uncommon at all- consider asd, 1 in (iirc) 86 kids diagnosed now, most not so severe but some are very much so and that is never diagnosable pre birth

We are one of the richest nations on the planet.
We SHOULD be able to care for and support the sick, the disabled and the elderly.

Some people find it easier to hand out death and judgement than find a way in their hearts to care for people who need care.
Shame on them, and well done to everyone who works in a caring role (paid and unpaid) to make someone's life better.
They should be truly admired, it is so sad that brainless women with big tits and selfish men who want to make lots of money and shag everything, get so much more attention in this world.

The thing is - a lot of people have what they think are "normal" children (I hate using that word in this way), but they may grow up with serious mental health problems, may become killers, junkies, rapists and so on. You can never select the perfect child, and I think it's wrong to want to do so.

Everyone obviously wants the best for their child, but would you love it any less because it had a disability? It's offensive to say that a disabled child is worth less.

"Not all 20 week scans take place bang on 20 weeks."

I had my 20 week scan last Friday - at 22+4.

Miggsie, that's exactly my view.

Well exactly, RainyWednesday.

I make the choice about whether or not to terminate way before a 20 week scan, I have an OSCAR at 12 weeks to give myself choice earlier too. My dp and I both know before we enter the ultrasound room that if they find anything wrong we would terminate (anything with in reason)and so this would be done in a matter of days, not 4 weeks. In China people are not afforded that choice all SN fetus's are aborted.

Peachy, sort of off topic but I just wanted to challenge you on your post

"and the education issue- there's no point. most people whose education is lacking in this area dont listen, and even when they do all that happens is that another 15 join thinking the same thing and its endless".

Although I imagine is is (or seems) endless, I'm not sure it is pointless. I'm thinking about the thousands of starfish stranded on the beach quote (I'm sure you know it given your studies). I'm not sure you will change the opinions of the voracious and aggressive posters on this (or any other mn hot topic), but you may well change the opinions of those who only come and post one thing (or those darned lurkers again ).

On a point more relevant to where this thread is going I remember going to GOS to a series of Christian Medical Ethics lectures. I was in my early 20's so def not thinking about the implications of being a parent with a disabled child or prenatal screening.

I was however profoundly affected by a short video of a couple who had decided to go full term with a baby who they knew, would not live for very long post delivery. Their message was that this childs life, as short as it was, was absolutely worth living. It had made them look into themselves as individuals and a couple as to what human life in all it's complexity was all about. They were amazing, just amazing (am welling up as I type this).

anyway my point is, is that it was their personal and heartwarming message that really struck a chord and has stayed with me all this time (the 8 hours or however long I was in that lecture theatre) has mostly gone.

I'm willing to wager (quite a lot) that it is the personal 'from the heart' posts on mn that may change the way people think about disability.

But Posie, some decisions depend on the degree of the problem, so you can't make that decision before you go in.

what about heart defects, where they range from the mild to the very severe? You can't decide ahead of time whether you would terminate until you know what you're dealing with, and that takes time, research and thought.

Added to which you need time to process the shock of being told your baby has a serious problem, before you can be sure of how you feel about it.

For some people it's very black and white - any problem, we terminate. For others, it's 'I would never terminate under any circumtances'.

For a lot of people, it needs some thought and time.

I think I may have seen that video Tatter, I have seen one about parents whose child had anencephaly. I was very moving and I thought they were incredibly brave and caring people.

Yes but TTT, you may well love any foetus you carry, no matter what.
Other women may not feel like that though. Yuo can't honestly believe that a woman who wants to terminate her pregnancy ( for whatever reason) and is denied that choice, is necessarily going to love that child or even grow to love it.

Do you think it's fair to that child to be born to a mother who never wanted it?
Not being born is not the worst thing that can happen to you.
Being unloved, unwanted and resented is pretty damn awful though

TTT yes, I'm sure that is the same couple.

I mean that we think through carefully what may come up, deformity like cleft pallet a no brainer, but Edwards would be an absolute. I hesitate to write that I would not be able to cope and wouldn't want to cope with a child with severe disabilities and I know that many people have wonderful lives shared with their children with a whole range of issues but I just couldn't do it. But I take your point about time for some to decide. perhaps we should bring the 20 week scan early, I had one at 18 weeks. Is there a reason we look at 20, precisely? (well not in most cases!!)

I had an unexpected pregnancy which came at a completely inconvenient time in my life, and I was ill for around nine months. I lost a job, and seriously affected my future career prospects. But I am so glad that I have my son, even though things have not been easy. I feel that once I became pregnant it was my responsibility to care for my baby - he didn't choose for me to get pregnant, and he was just as deserving of life as a planned baby.

I do appreciate that not everyone will feel the same way, but don't you think that sometimes people should put their own needs second and not use abortion as a kind of get-out clause?