I have just been called ableist because I support antenatal screening

[noideawheretostart]

And I'm so blind sided by it that I don't really know where to begin with how incorrect that statement is.

I think it rather does depend on your perspective. I chose to to have screening because I was not prepared to make decisions based on what I found out- so what's the point? Also, I knew several people whose screenings were very wrong.

I still support antenatal screening- I can't make choices for other people- but can understand that people with conditions which often lead to diagnosed foetuses being aborted might disagree.

Surely it is for the woman to decide what to do with the foetus inside their body? For whatever reason they choose?

I honestly do not understand how women wouldn't want antenatal screening. It's so so selfish.

what if the woman was going to abort any female foetus? That would undoubtedly be sexist/misogynistic and so I think aborting in the basis of a disability could be considered ableist.

Eurgh! I have been there too!

Friend A needed support for her antenatal screen, I went. Some time later, out in the pub, another friend, B, started in on me for having encouraged A in being ableist. I couldn't grasp the word so asked her to explain. The whole table looked at her as if she were mad then looked at me, to see how I would react.

I took a deep breath and said that she should mind her own business and trying to shame any woman to have, or not have, an abortion, for any reason whatsoever was unthinkably cruel and incredibly nasty. I was disgusted with her for bringin up such a private issue in public.

She cried and went home! A is in her 30s and desperate for a child having carried 2 full term both of whom died after just days from a congenital heart defect. We ALL know this! Thankfully A wasn't with us. But B has blocked me and is still bad mouthing me, as far as I can tell.

B and I are in our 50s, FFS!

I honestly do not understand how women wouldn't want antenatal screening. It's so so selfish.

I don't understand. Selfish for who? How?

I mean, as a biologist and educator there are ethical issues to debate here, I think, as there are with any sort of genetic screening. But terms like “abelist” etc that label and terminate thought are IMO extremely unhelpful.

I would start by saying something like “screening can actually help disabled people, as if the test returns positive, parents can better prepare for the arrival of a disabled child (make arrangements with qualified carers, schools, specialists, etc).

Then point out that not everyone is prepared to care for a disabled child, it’s very difficult to adopt out disabled children, and ultimately, my body my choice.

Finally some of the disorders found by these screenings inevitably lead to death before 2 yrs of age. Nothing but suffering for the child, family, or society.

if you are the one left holding the baby - literally then it's only fair for you to attend screenings and make decisions if the outcomes mean a big impact on baby and mother.

would those people also not attend ultrasound scans then? they are basically antenatal screening, nothing else. just with pictures.

As far as I'm aware, screening is optional. Nobody is forcing women to do it. It is recommended by midwives but nobody is holding a gun to your head.

I agree that work needs to be done on how news of possible disability is given to expectant mothers, and the options available with regards to continuing the pregnancy. Nobody should be immediately offering abortion.

But if a woman doesn't want to give birth to a baby, for whatever reason, she shouldn't have to continue to carry it. That is a fundamental right.

It’s not worth getting into an argument over.

These threads often get taken over by people virtue signalling that they refused all tests because they’re anti-abortion.

Personally, I think that knowledge is power. It doesn’t matter whether an individual would choose TFMR or not. Surely it's beneficial to not be blindsided by a serious medical issue at birth?

I attended a really interesting seminar at a disability conference where the speaker discussed issues around antenatal screening. She had a congenital condition which meant she was severely visually impaired, she also spoke passionately about being a feminist and a woman’s right to choose but how her feelings about antenatal testing for her own condition make her so conflicted.

It is a fundamental right, yes. I don’t have to agree with any woman’s reasons to have a termination and the fact that it might be because her child will have a disability is against my personal ethics, but she has the right to decide for herself. I campaign for better awareness around disability and a more inclusive society, not against any woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy.

There are girl fetuses aborted because of their sex. I think the person who made this comment wasn't thinking. What about the babies who are treated in the womb?

@53rdWay It's selfish bringing a disabled child into the world when you know the child is going to have no quality of life.

We have the benefit of the best healthcare in the world here in the UK. I don't understand people who would willingly take a chance to put their children through years of pain for disabilities that will hinder them and in many many cases be terminal.

That is interesting about the conference speaker, I wonder if they would screen?

I have two children with profound complex needs that there is currently no screening for.

I am glad that they are here, filling my life with heart bursting joy. Very very glad.

I don't know if I would've kept them or not if I had been able to screen. I wouldn't have known them, or how much they had to offer me. I still like to think i would have had the option to consider it though.

Screening covers so many different problems though. I had some screening, (but not amnio, as I would not have terminated my pregnancy if it had shown Down’s). Screening can flag up heart abnormalities, that mean labour can be managed to reduce risk, screening can allow women to prepare for a baby with health issues etc. I wanted to know roughly how my baby was doing.
My friend chose not to screen at all. No one else can make that choice, it is for each woman to decide, given her individual feelings and circumstances.

My point, @SirVixofVixHall, is that we should at least be given the option to screen. Which is what we currently have now.

I trained as a mw and went to a conference about screening, it was essentially a conference about how to ensure parents opted for screening ...with a few caveats about personal choice, but the emphasis was heavily on getting people to take part. That's what makes me uneasy. A lot of time, money and expertise goes into the screening programme. They are NOT investing all that just so parents can be 'better prepared'. I would never presume to have an opinion on what another woman does wrt to screening (or the results of screening) but at a societal level I think there are ethical issues which are not properly addressed.

What I hate most about these debates is someone always pulls out the card of how they know someone with X Y Z condition that lives a full and happy life; conveniently forgetting that many of the conditions that are screened for cause serious medical complications; and often result in a very short life filled with pain.

You can just as easily turn around the “how can you be a good mother and do antenatal screening” with the equally emotive argument of “how can you call yourself a good mother and not want to prepare any medical care or other support as early as possible”.

In reality, the issue is an intensely complicated one and we do ourselves no favours by throwing other women under the bus. (On either “side” of the debate).

I have to admit I side stepped much of the issue as in what actually is it?

Disableism? What is it?

I get it when it means the attitude that disabled people are inferior to non disabled people. But .. oh bollocks. I've just typed and dleeted twice!!! I can't say what I mean without it coming out all wrong, open to misunderstanding.

here, read this blog post!
thefword.org.uk/2016/05/badd2016/

It ends Fighting disablism and defending a woman’s right to choose should not be mutually exclusive. which sums up what I was trying to say!

Well if anti-natal screening is ableist I guess I'm ableist.

I'm not sure what anyone hopes to achieve by flinging such pejoratives about but what it won't achieve is changing my mind on which pregnancies I would or would not choose to continue. No woman should be pressurised by such puritanical thinking.

Discriminating against a person with a disability is not the same as choosing not to carry a disabled foetus to term. Just like murder and abortion are not the same thing. When we start regarding people and foetuses as equal it’s a very slippery slope towards banning abortion.

@53rdWay It's selfish bringing a disabled child into the world when you know the child is going to have no quality of life.

You understand 'disabled' is a very broad term and that 'quality of life' is far from a universally agreed on thing and varies for individuals, right? Screening for T21 is probably the most commonly discussed one in this country antenatally. Plenty of people with Down's and their families would take serious issue with the idea that it's selfish to have given birth to them, and rightly so.

I do think this is the kind of subject that sounds different when you're coming at it from the perspective of being disabled yourself though. I have a congenital disability - it's not the kind of thing that could be routinely screened for, but I wouldn't have screened for it even if it could have been.

@Dyrne well put!

Sounds like work needs to be done on how screening is offered to women, and how the options are presented should conditions be found.

Still don't think offering screening is ableist though.