Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Oh FFS I am shaking... has there been a thread yet about Minette Marin's unbelievable column on babies with Down's syndrome?

420 replies

emkana · 04/12/2008 22:37

words fail me

OP posts:
Monkeytrousers · 08/12/2008 20:57

She can say it JimJams, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't go unchallenged.

devoutsceptic · 08/12/2008 21:00

Well, I was the product of an accidental pregnancy and my birth locked my mother into an horrific marriage and cost her many years of her career (this was a long time ago!). I am glad I am alive and I'm pretty sure my mum is too, but I still think it's OK to have a termination because you are young, want to have a career and don't want a lifelong connnection with a man you don't love or like. I realise that it's not about ME. One of my close friends had a termination after finding herself in a very similar position to the one my mum was on all those years ago, and I never thought 'that baby is like ME, you murderer!'. I think that would be totally unreasonable. In fact, I think my friend made the right choice, and so does she.

amber32002 · 08/12/2008 21:01

MT, all any test can tell a parent is that the child will have a disability, not what their quality of life will be like. Most children with a disability do not 'suffer' any more than anyone else does. Note the word 'most' It's important. And yup, I still hold that view because I'm fighting a system that wants to test for autism so they can ensure there's none of us left alive.

wannaBe · 08/12/2008 21:02

well equally a woman can say that she can terminate her pregnancy because of disability, but that doesn't mean it has to go unchallenged...

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 08/12/2008 21:03

A someone who has met wannabe I can really say that you do need to think about what you can do. Wannabe was quite inspirational to me (I hope that doesn't make you feel patronised wannabe) because she refuses to see herself as disabled. However, when I met her I suddenly realised I take my sight for granted, I use it to do things that I hadn't even thought about before. And when I met wannabe I had to suddenly try and (excuse this - but I think it's appropriate) 'see the world through her eyes'.

Now I could sit down and draw up a huge list of the things that wannabe can't do that I can - because simply I have sight and she doesn't- but I wouldn't dare, because she is so determined to not be limited by her disability (and she isn't). And anyway you could draw up those sorts of comparison lists with anyone.

IN my son's case he can't be as independent as her, he never will be, but I can ensure he's not limited by his disability.

Wannabe's life is her life. It's full and active. My son's life will be his life (after all we only get one). I'm not going to spend it wishing it was a different life. He has his issues, now he has to live as full as life as he can within those. Just like all the rest of us. My life, is my life- there are 1001 things I could do that I don't. The same for all of us.

Actually the book 'a real boy' was helpful in fostering this attitude as well. The father in that rocks!

devoutsceptic · 08/12/2008 21:03

You see, that's what I see as the problem. Nobody wants to kill you Amber. Just as someone who wants a termination because their baby is unplanned and they don't like the father is planning to kill ME.

FattipuffsandThinnifers · 08/12/2008 21:07

I have been lurking on this thread. That article was truly thoughtless, offensive and pathetic. But it seems to me that there are two separate issues here, surely.

  1. the ethics of whether terminating a pregnancy because of SN is akin to saying that people with SN are less important/valid as other people (which is apparently what that vile article said),

and

  1. whether you consider abortion to be akin to murder.

If you believe 2) then it is irrelevant why the abortion happened. Presumably the vast majority of abortions take place because the parent/s feel unable (in advance) to cope with a child for whatever reason. If SN is one of those reasons, it is no more or less valid than, say, financial pressures, being single, too young, etc.

In many cases the reality of having that child will be nothing like what the pregnant woman may fear, but if you can accept abortion for one reason, why not all? Any aborted foetus is a life negated pre-birth, but if you are pro-choice surely the reason isn't a cause for judgement?

amber32002 · 08/12/2008 21:07

devoutsceptic, not wanting people like me to live may not be the same as actually murdering me, but what would the practical difference be in the future? Either way, future 'me's' most likely won't be here, because of the assumption that the risk of us suffering and wrecking families is too great. It doesn't exactly give us much of a future chance, does it.

devoutsceptic · 08/12/2008 21:14

But there isn't a future 'you', is there? As it happens I think that eliminating, say, Asperger syndrome would be a total own-goal for humanity, even if it's only because half the world's geniuses have been Aspies! I can understand the viewpoint that termination indicates that people do not value the qualities of people with the condition being terminated for, and can respect that, but I tend to think individuals do not terminate because they hate and despise people with, say Downs or Edwards, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy or spina bifida but because they are worried about their ability to cope, and worried about the potential child's pain or difficulties, and their own.

wannaBe · 08/12/2008 21:26

devoutsceptic but that is where I think you are wrong.

There are many many people who feel that they could not love a child with a disability as they would love their own children. Look at the pregnancy topic and search for posts about downs testing for instance - this view has been expressed on here regularly.

I think the fears about being able to cope/potential pain and suffering are valid and should be acknowledged. But the question as to whether one could love a disabled child the same as other children? I cannot understand why anyone would think like that, and I don't think that view deserves any acknowledgement at all.

wannaBe · 08/12/2008 21:29

and fwiw I know someone whose view is that any child with a disability who will never make a contribution to society (whatever that is) should be killed. he also believes that if a woman is found to be carrying a disabled child then termination should be compulsory. his view is of course extreme, but it just goes to show that people with these views do exist.

He is not among my circle of friends btw, and I have made known to him in no uncertain terms what I think of him and his opinions...

devoutsceptic · 08/12/2008 21:38

Wannabe, that boke is a nutter, and a seriously nasty one, I agree. His views are disgusting and inexcusable. But I really don't think that's why people terminate. I have met a couple of people who terminated AFTER having a child with a disability, because they discovered in pregnancy that the foetus had the same genetic condition. They certainly loved their other child.
I think it's hard to imagine loving a potential child full stop (there are loads of threads with people saying they are seriously worieed about loving another child as much as their first!) though I admit that people may well be more likely to feel this about a child with SN.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 08/12/2008 22:10

"Downs or Edwards, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy or spina bifida but because they are worried about their ability to cope, and worried about the potential child's pain or difficulties,"

I was lucky enough to go to school with someone with spina bifida She had to wear a special shoe, that was the extent of her disability. And so I learned about spectrum conditions and the inability for screening to distinguish between the ends of the spectrum.

I think this is problem though. For many conditions the rhetoric and language used by doctors overstates the condition. Yes doctors probably know about muscular dystrophy- it's medical condition. They know bugger all about learning disabilities.

wannaBe · 08/12/2008 22:39

and if doctors don't know, in reality what hope is there for everyone else? After all, we put our faith in the medical profession to inform us of the realities, and the reality so often is that they don't know.

I can remember reading a post on here from someone who was told her child would never walk, talk, would have severe learning difficulties (baby was prem iirc). Anyway years on the child is basically a completely "normal" child. Imagine if the doctors had said that to her while baby was still in utero. she could well have terminated a perfectly "normal" fetus, but would always have been of the belief that she had terminated a disabled child.

Flocci · 08/12/2008 22:43

Wannabe, my children are my life - since they were born everything else has stopped and my reason for waking each day is to enjoy my time with them and be with them and create a great home life for them. I would never ever say that I wish dd wasn't here - i can't imagine my life without either of them.

But to have this kind of debate you have to step back from the individual personalities. So many of the postings have gone a bit off piste with people talking about shooting and murdering specific children and each other ..... that is all a bit mental ...... once you have a child you have a child and as a mum that is your life and there you go, you make it the best life you bloody well can.

But before she was born and i held my precious very tiny wee ones and fell totally head over heels in love with them both they were just specks in my tummy which would hopefully grow into the charming children I now have. And at that point I would not have wanted to continue, knowing what I was letting her in for.

I agree that if the system and society were better then maybe i wouldn't feel like this so much. If someone could guarantee that she would always have the facilities and equipment and care that she needs then I wouldn't feel so sad for her, but that isn't the case is it? And if you could guarantee that she will have full time support in her life for ever with someone who will take really good care for her the way I do then again i would feel better - but that isn't the case.

My hope is that i am just a totally over-anxious mum who is going to be proved wrong over the next 15 years. But at the moment dealing with the current daily issues she has it seems very sad. And even if things improve in the future it doesn't stop the things she is suffering with now.

wannaBe · 08/12/2008 22:54

Flocci can i ask what is the extent of your dd's disability?

You say she does use a wheelchair, but occasionally uses a frame, other than that what other difficulties does she have? Does she have learning difficulties as well? Or are her difficulties only physical ones?

Attitudes towards the disabled are changing. I remember when i got my first job no-one would employ me because I had a disability. legally they were allowed to do that back then, and it took me 168 applications before I got a job. With my last job however it was the first interview I went for, and within 9 months i had been promoted to management, so there was never any question of not being accepted.

I think that it's hardest when we are children. Because parents have to fight for everything. And if a child has learning difficulties then the parents often have to continue to fight for them into adulthood, whereas if the disability is a physical one then the child grows into an adult and gains the skills to fight for themselves.

amber32002 · 09/12/2008 08:02

A bit of research shows that in 2007 there were 135 abortions carried out for children with disabilities at over 24 weeks gestation. At over 24 weeks, do we think the babies don't feel any pain? We go absolutely mad trying to save the ones without the disabilities at that age, spending tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds on each tiny life.

Let's look at the argument that we would surely only abort the disabled babies out of pity for their suffering or the future suffering of their parents:

Between 1996 and 2004, 20 babies were aborted because of club foot, which is treatable, and a further four because they had extra fingers/toes, which again is fully treatable. All of these took place at more than 20 weeks.

Between 1995 and 2001 there were 26 abortions for cleft lip/palate, and two of these were carried out at more than 24 weeks. It's nearly always treatable, correctable.

So, all this suffering of child and parent? Hmm. Not always, it seems.

And now they want to expand the genetic testing to give parents more "choice" about their babies. The list above is what ends up being chosen by a number of parents: Designer babies. No minor imperfections allowed, let alone big ones, and special rules that say that even minor imperfections can mean a baby that's viable can be aborted.

I'm still not happy about it. I see no reason why I should be. I do think there are circumstances under which an abortion is the kindest thing, but the ethics for termination where disability is concerned are very, very dubious indeed at present, and I can see it getting worse, not better.

In my view, unless we're able to see people with a disability as people first, and the disability afterwards, we might as well pick up that shotgun, because we're still saying that those with disabilities automatically start out with no right to life.

cory · 09/12/2008 08:50

Amber sums it up perfectly:

"I do think there are circumstances under which an abortion is the kindest thing, but the ethics for termination where disability is concerned are very, very dubious indeed at present, and I can see it getting worse, not better."

That is just what I felt. I am a believer in abortion as such, and I can see that if parents are allowed to abort due to being unable to cope with their circumstances, then (depending on the vulnerability of the parents) severe disability might be counted as part of those circumstances.

But it's the difference that gets you, the way you are positively encouraged to test for disability with a view to termination.

And the statistics quoted by Amber does make you reel. Unless there was something seriously wrong with the parents and the disability was quoted as an excuse. But frankly, that would mean something seriously wrong with the system if you could use a clubfoot or extra fingers as an excuse for aborting a foetus.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 09/12/2008 08:58

Well our dear MM in another column points out that it's perfectly OK to terminate late for cleft palate because you wouldn't want to give birth to a minger when society values beauty (paraphrased).

a) shallow beyond belief.
b) some cases of even severe cleft palate are not visible (if there is no involvement with the lip- no-one noticed my cousin's cleft palate until he was about 3 days old and had been unable to feed. His aunt noticed it.)
c) the woman has very dodgy views that border on the dangerous.

slightlychristmasycrumpled · 09/12/2008 09:38

Good grief she is a bloody worry! They are horrendous views. My little boy has a type of cleft (non visable) that wasn't picked up untill he was four years old!

KewcumbersRoastingOnAnOpenFire · 09/12/2008 09:46

I generally stay out of abortion debates because I never managed to get pregnant and thereofre tend to feel that I don't have a right to an opinin other than being generally pro-choice. However the thought of anyone choosing to abort on the grounds of club foot, cleft palate etc makes me want to weep.

Probably a few years ago I might has been inclined to havea termination myself if any pregnancy was at high risk of DS. Over the past few years however I have:

a) realised that I can cope with any number if things that I thought I couldn't and in fact they weren't really (in the grand scheme of things) anywhere near as difficult as I thought they would be

b) have RL experience of friends with children who have DS and the "fear factor" of the unknown is gone.

I became a parent because I wanted to nuture and teach, love and enjoy my children - I don't see how that changes whether a child is disabled in some way or not.

I wasnt trying to populate the world with perfect humans (luckily for me - not being one myself).

FioFio · 09/12/2008 10:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

SlipAStableUnderTheTree · 09/12/2008 11:46

Hmm. I've been mulling this for a few days, since my younger sister (now 25) has Down syndrome. I have worked for a Down syndrome charity, and with a lot of children and adults who have severe learning disabilities, as have my parents since my sister was born; hands-on Mencap-related work has been central to our family life for the last 25 years. I haven't read all the posts, but here's my two-penneth:

I don't agree with a lot of Marrin's article. For example, she is right that we live in a physical beauty-worshipping culture - but this is not a behaviour/mentality I - nor most people, I would hope - would wish to encourage by terminating foetuses with mild, treatable/manageable physical deformities. Some of the statements she makes in the vein of disability being all grim are utterly incorrect.

However, on the basis of my own experience, there are some truths in what she writes - even if they need to be isolated from the negatively biased tone of her writing. IMO, these truths are:

Many children with Down syndrome are truly delightful and spread immense love and good cheer among their families, friends and communities. My sister did just this, well into adolescence; caring for her was, at times, hard work, but she lit up our lives, no question.

At least half of the adults I know with Down syndrome, however, including my sister now, do experience a less than happy life. My sister went away to residential college in her late teens, to learn life skills, and blossomed. She went, funded largely by my dad's inheritance from his mother's death, on the understanding that Social Services would fund her moving into supported living when she completed her time at college. They did not honour this commitment - on funding grounds (consistent with Marin's article) - and my sister came home to my parents' house to find my brother moved to another country, and me moved out, with my own little boy. This was over three years ago, and she has been depressed and anxious to varying degrees - sometimes frighteningly severely - ever since. Her newly learned independent skills have been lost, she barely talks anymore, she went through an incredibly long phase of bursting into heart-wrenching sobs at the drop of a hat - and because of her limited language and comprehension, there is little we can do to reassure her - and she can't articulate exactly why she feels so low. She has also developed OCD tendencies, including not wanting to come within a metre of me and, if I manage to steal a hug or a stroke, she brushes the area where I touched her - as if I'm contaminated, or something like it. Utterly heartbreaking. She cannot utilise the talking therapies - CBT, psychotherapy, group - that are available to the rest of us.

She has been on antidepressants for a couple of years now, and we have finally found a dose which means she is no longer tearful, and her sleep is no longer broken by anxiety attacks, and so Mum doesn't need to lay with her all night now. She also welcomes the odd hug now too, which is a relief. However, she is a shadow, a tiny shadow, of her old sunny self, and we have now realised we will probably never see her on full form again.

It has been a devastating few years, seeing my sister feeling so low and disappearing, almost - and seeing how much her day-to-day care has taken over my mum's life, and the campaigning for and management of her support services has dominated my dad's. It's their life. They are 59 and 55.

I know this is one example, but when I ran a social club for young adults who have learning disabilities, there were several other vibrant, fun-loving people with Down syndrome in the group. I have since heard that these young adults have now also become depressed, one of them has been sectioned, and they too are not their "old selves". My sister's learning disability psychiatrist has said that this is a common pattern among people who have more severe learning disabilities - not simply because of the disabilities themselves, but because as they hit adulthood and see their siblings, neighbours, peers on TV, etc, pursue higher education, undertake meaningful work, find partners and have children and the like - they feel left behind; excluded. The reality is that most adults who have a severe learning disability will not enjoy most of these things - and Marin is also right in saying that the activities and pursuits available to people who have a learning disability do seem to dry up as they grow into adulthood. At least they do where we are, and we have one of the most active local Mencap organisations in the country.

Also, the adult world is a lot harder to make sense of - and to adapt to - for a person who has a severe learning disability, than a child's world full of play, fun and free-flowing affection.

Consistent with Marin's article, there is not enough funding to give all the adults with a learning disability a fulfilling, semi-independent life, and the real life consequences are bleak - for people like my sister, and their carers too.

So, from my own experience, some of what Marin is saying rings true. And while, when pregnant with my DS, I would not entertain a single test being undertaken - DP and I were passionately committed to loving and supporting the child we brought into the world, whether disabled or not - I have surprised myself with how my outlook has changed over the past few years. Seeing my sister go through what she has (and to a degree, still is), and my parents, and knowing how much caring I have already done, and will need to do again in the future, I know that should I fall pregnant again, I may now undergo tests for Down syndrome. I never thought I'd say that, but that's how I feel. However, I don't necessarily know how I'd respond to the results ...

One last thought, though, is that of all the families I have worked with, who have a family member with a severe learning disability, there is one wonderful family who have had (and still do have) what stands out to me as the greatest care burden of all. The nature of their (now grown-up) daughter's disability is such that it would never be able to be detected in utero, yet the reality of living with it makes a treatable cleft lip seem like a relative walk in the park.

So it's not black-and-white, this abort-foetuses-with-obvious-disabilities business. On the whole, in spite of seeing close-hand a very bleak aspect of severe learning disability in adulthood, I'm with India Knight on this subject. However, I wanted to point out that some of what Marrin writes, albeit not in an endearing manner, is IMO correct.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt · 09/12/2008 12:02

But those are all failings of the services & article writers should be screaming about that - not seeing removing the individual as the answer. And I think your sisters case shows what a difference decent service provision can make. Unfortunately they're a group that no-one really gives a damn about & that opinion is probably reinforced by the expectation of termination iyswim.

The young adult I know with DS lives in a supported accommodation, has a number of small jobs, is taking some sort of basic computer course, spends time with his girlfriend. This should be accessible to all. Social services should not be allowed to wriggle out of paying for this sort of thing.

Mind you he went to residential school, and have been told that it's far easier to get a decent adult care package if your child is in resi (I suppose SS are used to contributing towards £200 000 in fees each year)

SlipAStableUnderTheTree · 09/12/2008 13:03

I wholeheartedly agree jimjams. And yes, Marin would do better to highlight the failings of support services: the services should be better and are at the heart of what would make the life of an adult with Down syndrome (and in turn, the lives of their family members) so much more fulfilling. The reality though, at least as far as I can see, is that most adults with a (severe) learning disability don't enjoy the kind of life your friend does. The money is simply not there (or at the very least, not being apportioned) to provide every adult who has a learning disability with this standard of living. Also, many adults with a severe learning disability (my sister included) are unable to hold down a part-time job, as your friend does.

Mum and Dad have been campaigning their socks of for years on this matter; they're bright, and 100% committed to the cause, and invest hours and hours in it - not something all parents can do - and yet still, the provision is not there. I think this is what discourages me. I agree with you that support services should be massively improved, but I don't really believe that they will be - not sufficiently. Really, how could it be afforded?

So for me, while I don't doubt that children with learning disabilities are often happy and bring immense joy and love to the lives of those close to them (my sister certainly did this throughout her childhood and in adolescence), it is the likely quality of their adult life that has made me at least begin to question my until-recently anti-testing, anti-abortion stance.

Swipe left for the next trending thread