Please can we talk about what "pro choice" means?

[BertrandRussell]

Some threads on here, and coincidentally, a couple of real life conversations prompted by a recent television programme, have made me think that there is an attempt to erode the meaning of the term. For me, pro choice means that a woman should be able to have an abortion within the law because she wants to. Her reasons are immaterial.

Soubriquet, according to SCOPE, Disablism is: discriminatory, oppressive or abusive behaviour arising from the belief that disabled people are inferior to others

I'm a bit about making women who have had a termination feel inferior. If it was my decision that I had made on my own and was 100% sure about, nobody could make me feel inferior.

Surely you would only feel guilty or inferior if you doubted your decision?

It can be difficult

I wouldn't want to have an abortion but I don't think I could cope with a disabled baby.

So I would feel terribly guilty about having an abortion because it was a baby I wanted, yet i recognise my own abilities.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27067497

This is a fairly recently published study on cognitive decline with DS. All 45 people with followed up over 27 years developed dementia. Cognitive decline started as early with the "turning point" being 35 years with all subjects at the end of the study showing signs of clinical dementia.

Alzheimer's may not be inevitable but dementia (encompassing is).

This study was published in 2016.

I have only ever heard disabilism on MN, I always thought it was ableism, which is discrimination and prejudice towards those with disabilities. Of course it includes value judgements and language used when in relation to a disability specific subject matter.

I think this thread was a bit inappropriate to start on the back of the other though.

As for termination to term. I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this as I've skim read but alot of genetic conditions can only be tested for in the very latter stages of pregnancy. Alot of these cases are tested for because there is already a sibling with the condition or a family history and alot of these conditions are profound. I think the people (or women) involved in those scenarios have more experience to fall back on than random people on the internet.

"I'm a bit hmm about making women who have had a termination feel inferior. If it was my decision that I had made on my own and was 100% sure about, nobody could make me feel inferior."

Well, there are plenty of people saying that people have made them feel inferior for not wanting a termination.......does it only work one way?

Nolongersurprised, people with down syndrome had no access to education until the late 80s and into the 90s. That study has followed people with the condition prior to that, which I gather is peoples issue with current/up to date information.

misinformed and has certainly got some preconceived ideas about DS in particular:

Thunderwing, what ideas in particular? are misinformed?
I think, as most of us on here, are actually really caring people, like Bertrand said, none of us are that stupid or uncaring, or we wouldn't be on this thread in the first place.

I think I have a semi reasonable grasp of DS. What ideas is it that are mis-informed? specifically please.
I still wouldn't chose it? would you? to have DS? mind you I wouldn't chose ASD/Diabetes/Cancer or anything else actually.

Nolonger this study began in 1988 and focussed on people aged between 20 and 58. So these people had not benefitted from education in many cases (as people with DS were denied any education prior to 1970, and mainstream education from 1981 onwards)

It is a well recognised fact that dementia can be offset by maintaining an active mind. Too many generations of people with DS were severely neglected and let down by the system, now we are doing better I will wait with interest to see the figures of people with DS who get early onset
dementia having gone through a full education.

Owllady. that was quite a few years ago , now though, wasn't it? DS not in mainstream? in the 80's and 90's. But it got better since the 90's, a tiny bit better in the 00's and they have been in mainstream, some DS, for the last 15 years, so for the last 25, its certainly getting better.
so, 25 years is quite a long time, a generation.
I know 2 DS children in my local mainstream schools. Have been for the the whole of their primary.

Well, there are plenty of people saying that people have made them feel inferior for not wanting a termination.......does it only work one way?

No it doesn't. Certainty of your position, whatever that is, should negate any feelings of guilt or inferiority.

Oblomov, I was referring to the study that was linked to by nolonger. It took a section of adults in 1988.

A section of adults with down syndrome
Sorry

But to take it back to basics: I believe (being pro-choice) that a woman should be able to terminate a pregnancy for no reason at all. Just because they don't want a baby. To then put limits on abortion because of disability or potential disability makes no sense at all.

You literally can't believe the first statement AND the second statement, without some serious double-think. That doesn't make me disablist, it makes me pro-choice.

Oblomov I said earlier I don't want to derail this thread - there are links on my previous post about dementia, independent living and lifespan. They are just a few things which were mentioned.

I still wouldn't chose it? would you? to have DS? mind you I wouldn't chose ASD/Diabetes/Cancer or anything else actually.

If I could be like my daughter or any one of the many, many, people I've met who have DS, yes I would choose DS. If I could have another child with DS, I would. If it was a choice between an extra chromosome or a terminal illness like cancer, then yes I would choose DS.

I agree it's a moral or ethical argument and not a legal one. The legal standpoint should be if a woman wants to terminate she can, as I have said and as the law states.

I think imho choosing genetic characteristics would be easier at a sperm/egg stage than finding out a child has genetics you or they cannot live with post 24 weeks. My viewpoint is not about denying women terminations, it's maybe reducing the circumstances where a late termination is the only option for some women. Is that not a good thing, to have more options?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26391049

Current Alzheimer's literature now accepts that DS has "near universal" presence of AD related neuropathology.

I don't actually want to derail either, but as cognitive testing of people with intellectual disabilities has improved the earlier recognition of cognitive decline in adults of DS has become more obvious.

There is some promising drug research being done as well though.

I find it fascinating that people don't seem to want to engage with the "if restrictions-what restrictions?" question. Is there a reason for this that I've missed, or it just too difficult.

No restrictions.

No woman will make this choice without good reason. Trust women, why not.

I don't think there should be restrictions on abortion on disabled/not disabled, healthy/not healthy feotus to term.

Lonny I don't think many (any?) on this thread have said women should not be allowed to terminate without justifying their reasons to people.

However posters have been questioning what it is, that makes our country a place where women terminate due to disability, namely, Down's. Yes, there are health risks and risks of severe cognitive impairments but why is the societal focus on termination, rather than managing those cognitive impairments and treating those health conditions?

The rhetoric that focuses on highlighting risks, in connection with Down's, in order to justify termination due to foetal diagnosis, misses the point, if the majority of posters are pro-choice, that is, regarding women not having to justify their reasons for termination. We don't need to have the reasons for termination 'rammed down our throats', we know what they are. We just want society to be pro-active concerning finding solutions to the problems which cause a woman to feel she has to terminate her pregnancy. An overemphasis on justifying a woman's reasons for termination takes the focus away from this.

Thunderwing. I think I get you now. I totally get where you are coming from. and understand it.

I, on the other hand, am totally different from you. I wouldn't choose anything. Anything that makes us different, anything that makes life more difficult. I would choose the easy life, given half a chance. I wouldn't choose diabetes for myself, I wouldn't choose asd for ds1.

Mrs Oblomov (this is a joke btw) lets choose the characteristics for your next baby ( I am unable to, and do not desire any more children, but lets pretend):

boy or girl - don't mind, maybe a girl, because I don't have one?
tall or short? medium please
fat or thin? medium please - hourglass figure please
very clever or thick as shit? what do you think?
ginger? no, I've already got one(he's extremely ginger proud, but that's not the point), no to that please.
glasses? no, all of us wear them, no thanks
perfect teeth or a lifetimes worth of dental work? perfect please
any medical conditions? preference for ASD etc? ........ no thanks. no to all.

Depends on the person. Depends how strong you are. We can all cope with varying degrees of difficulty. Some of the things I read on the SN board, where people have life much more difficult than I do, reminds me.....

do you remember years ago, cant remember the poster, her cerebral palsy dd, having fits all night every night, respite was removed. FFS. That hit me hard. My life aint as easy as some, but its a lot easier than many. sometimes I forget that, I get so self centred, I cant see the bigger picture.

it's just too difficult - Bertrand

So, Rock.

Under what conditions would you allow abortions if you were in the position to say?

I am sure i have read that in the Western world, if sex selection was allowed it would actually be more boy babies who would be terminated than girls.

I personally think abortion should be available on demand for any reason up until 30 weeks and until term if the foetus has a disability ( as some are only found very late).

This is not what we have now on the UK. If doctors went by the actual law we would have very few abortions.

So, IMO, we need to accept there is a problem with high abortion rates to due to Down's. Otherwise people may think these high abortion rates are acceptable. But the solution isn't to make choosing abortion more difficult but rather to tackle what it is that makes living with Down's so problematic in our society.