to think that if a couple are both very disabled that they are very selfish to have children

[selfishIMHO]

who end up being their carers?
I understand that some people become ill/disabled or have accidents. But if I had a dibilitating disease and my husband had something chronic too I would npt have children that I could not give a good life to. A life that would mean from a young age they do most if not all of the housework and help me get dressed, wash etc. It's just wrong. Those poor children with the weight of the world on their shoulders.
Having children is not a right.

Ahh yes, that old chestnut of because my disability is not visible, it means its not as hard work....

OP - put ear plugs in for a day and then get back to me on that one please!

It breaks my heart to see children having to care for their parents, but I think this is a SS issue - not a parental issue. Its not for people to say oh, well so and so shouldn't have children because of X, Y, Z.

Riven -- DS and I lived on Ward 38...

but surely they are only disabled as according to society.

if society catered for all manner of abilities then no-one would actually be disabled would they???

god, I hate people like the OP, with their own fucked up wisdom and smug superiority(sp?).

I feel personally that people like the OP should not be able to have children, as then we would not have the type of fucked up judgemental fuckwits about..................

I am hoping to carry a baby for my disabled sister very soon and have come up against these views, including from within our family. This from StealthPolarBear spoke to me:

It's not ideal to have children if you're disabled, but then most of us aren't in ideal situations, and life is for living (and reproducing ) for all of us, not just those who tick all the boxes and have a cast iron guarantee of nothing changing for 18 years.

expat - was fab wasn't it

exactly psycho - apart from violent criminals we're all part of society, aren';t we?

well, to be fair, even violent criminals are part of society.

it is just that their version of society is as fucked up as the OP's...

I was hoping the the OP would come back and define exactly what she means by very disabled - maybe shes got a little sliding scale set up in a monty python type way - [points]fine, fine, bit dodgy, no that ones right out...

ffs.

totally

I have not said people with disblilities should not have children.
I have not said a couple with disablilities would be bad parents.
All I have asked is that in the circumstance in which a child is born to parents who know that that child will have to take on the reponsibility of carer and housekeeper is it selfish to have that child?

I worked with parents with disabilities for many years. My OH is also disabled as is my sister plus several other family members.

In my experience (which as described is fairly extensive - so there) is that children of disabled parents tend to do less than other kids. This is because most disabled parents are so bloody terrified that their kids will be labled young carers they dont let the little darlings to anything!

NO kids should NOT look after their parents. I feel very strongly about this. There should be mauch nore help available for families in this position. The services available tend to be prescriptive and inflexible. Parents dont want to ask for help because to get any thier children have to be classed as 'children in need' or even 'at risk'. Who the hell wants that? I hate those horrible articles in the DM 'he is our eyes/legs/ears etc'. I cant stand the programmes that show kids caring for their parents but offer no sort of solution, just a 'ahh aint he a little angel' .

Services still do not seem to be able to get their heads round the fact that disabled people have kids. People were always getting the wrong end of the stick when I told them what I did. They wold constantly assume that I worked with parents of disabled children.

There ARE some bloody awful parents out there who happen to be disabled but that is hardly rare in non disabled parents is it?

Selfish? We are. We had another baby after OHs diagnosis. It was also after the loss of a child therefore burdening the poor wee soul with parents who are crippled physically AND emotionally.

Call childline.

"will have to take on the reponsibility of carer and housekeeper is it selfish to have that child? "

which rather begs the question - who was doing it before they had children????

I agree entirely with the social model of disability and that SS should support children if their parents need care... but, perhaps unfairly, can't help wondering how that 9yo boy on Comic Relief ended up in that situation.

His parents must be/have been capable of independent living (they were blind, IIRC) so how come he has ended up taking on responsibility for tasks like cooking and caring for his little brother? How did it happen?

(I mean, I know blind people who do their own cooking - so why is this little boy cooking for his parents? Not entirely out of choice as he was describing not being able to keep up with his schoolwork...)

have to confess I didn't watch any of comic relief (I was having a party then out on the town ) - but that does sound odd edam.

Everyone keeps describing situations in which their children are not carers and asking me to condemn them??

Having children is always selfish. Try to think of a reason to have a baby that doesn't start with "I want" or "We want" or some variation thereof.

The point is how many disabled people have children in order to arrange cheap and easy personal care?

IMO none.

For a start its AGES before the little freeloaders can make a cup of tea, let alone nip down to Asda for a packet of fags.

Just not worth the stitches.