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 this is yet another situation where women are damned whatever decision they make. And it's generally directed at mothers, not fathers.

If you have a disabled child you're selfish. If you don't have a disabled child, you're selfish. Between the right and the left, you can't do anything right. Which is exactly where those who seek to control women want us to be. Always in the wrong.

There was nothing insulting about disabled people in my post.

Matter of fact about a foetus or unborn cell clump, maybe.

Is it not appropriate to ask who is expected to Pick up the lifelong tab that comes with severe disabilities.

Your latter comment contradicts your former.

Are you just going to keep digging?

Is it not appropriate to ask who is expected to Pick up the lifelong tab that comes with severe disabilities.

Society as a whole should protect the vulnerable. It seems pretty straightforward to me.

I am pro women having ALL possible information made available to them.
I am pro women making informed, uncoerced decisions about whether to continue their pregnancies or not.

The information that results in a woman making her decision about her body and her future is not my concern.

Her reasons are not my concern.
Her body, her life, her decision.

Is it not appropriate to ask who is expected to Pick up the lifelong tab that comes with severe disabilities.

What else are you going to include though, or is it just unborn children with disabilities you take issue with?

How about smokers, people who do dangerous sports, people who got drunk out of their heads every weekend... How about how much they cost society?

Just as I would argue that every woman has the right to terminate a pregnancy so I will.also argue that every woman has the right not to terminate. Forcing a woman to terminate is just as bad as forcing her not to terminate.

Pretty sure nobody here is in favor of forcing women to terminate...

Tell the person to fuck off. Having scans established that I, as somebody with a degenerative condition, would have most probably died along with my child had I even gone into labour with her.

Not supporting scans means that they are also against disabled mothers getting issues identified and handled prior to dying or becoming seriously ill during pregnancy - no placenta praevia detected, no molar pregnancies spotted, no cephalo pelvic disproportion identified, no issues that could be influenced by the medical condition of the mother. Just so many things that affect the mother - unless they think that disabled women shouldn't/can't get pregnant?

Personal choice. Noone elses.

Noone else has to go through the pregnancy, labour and lifelong implications the same as the DM does.

I can completely understand women who don't take up the first blood tests. Women have aborted perfectly healthy babies on the basis of their speculative nature. Its a minefield.

Most of the people bleating on about this issue have never had a severely disabled family member. My gran and grandad gave up their lives to care for a severely disabled child. When they died their eldest child had to leave his girlfriend and take over the 24-7 care of his disabled sibling. When he died the next sibling (my DF) had to take over. So I lost my DF, my DC lost their grandad and my DM lost her husband. That’s ten lives in four generations that have been negatively affected by the burden of caring for one person with severe disability. I don’t judge anyone for deciding that’s not what they want for their family.

@Somerville I think that making ANY section of society a taboo subject does them a great disservice.

At some point int the probably not so distant future there will be another legal discussion about health rationing, who knwo who it will include?

You really cannot ignore the fact overweight people and smokers are already having services withdrawn on one hand whilst decrying the mooted withdrawal of services from another cohort. That just means that YOU are placing a hierarchy of deservingness(??) on some pople over others - which is surely what you are objecting to!

Pretty sure nobody here is in favor of forcing women to terminate...
Really? Maybe read Miaowing s comments again then - only I think saying that women are selfish for refusing antenatal testing and that the state should not have to pick up the tab for children with lifelong needs would have the effect of compelling women to have terminations.

Certainly from my own experience, and as repeated by other women on this thread, the drs also present this as a done deal - you will have the test, and then if abnormalities bare confirmed you'll have a termination. It certainly wasn't presented to me as a choice until I stuck my heels in and refused to do as I was told. It also wasn't presented as a valid choice when I refused the triple test during my 2nd pregnancy either when I had to justify my decision again and again to every midwife and Dr I encountered.

Can I just take a moment to note how depressing it is that we've all been gradually trained to accept the dystopian nightmare scenario of gradual withdrawal of medical services from one group after another?

Just to make it clear - I don't think a mother choosing to test for abnormalities and then terminate is being ableist.

I do think that drs who.push that decision onto parents along with all the negatives that they decide having a child with disabilities entails, along with a society that sees disability as something that should not be screened out, is ableist.

the drs also present this as a done deal - you will have the test, and then if abnormalities bare confirmed you'll have a termination

This certainly didnt happen to me, i was obviously lucky

Sympathies tequila it must have been dreadful to encounter this sort of behaviour in the doctors you were dealing with

I have an adult sister with DS. My parents are full time carers for her as well as now caring for my 96-year-old grandmother.

I love my sister dearly but she is largely the reason that when I was pregnant with DD I had the Foetal Harmony test at 12 weeks. If it had come back positive for DS I would definitely have had a termination.

I live in Ireland and during the run-up to the 8th Amendment referendum Down Syndrome Ireland pleaded with both sides not to weaponise people with DS in the debates. A request largely ignored by the 'pro life' side. What I found particularly infuriating was that you never, ever saw the same people and groups who were quite happy to use a picture of a cute DS child on an emotive anti abortion poster campaigning for better supports and services for people with disabilities.

If these services were much better than they are in Ireland would that have meant I would have made a different decision in the event of a positive test result? If I am brutally honest with myself, probably not - but the point I am making is that there is a hell of a lot more to how a society treats and values people with disabilities than than the availability of screening tests and terminations.

Having said all that I also agree with PPs that as a society we must be very careful to guard against moving towards a place where it is seen as a choice to have a disabled child and that therefore the costs of caring for individuals with disabilities should rest solely with relatives rather than with the state. Not sure how we do guard against that in the context of the increasingly wide availability of screening for different conditions - interested to hear others' views!

I support a woman's right to choose. I support women (and partners) making informed decisions. Nothing ableist about antenatal screening at all. It's a classic wedge issue used by anti-abortion lobby. Lord Shinkwin was pushing this wedge issue a few years ago.

This discussion always seem to ignore the small detail of the mothers who have to raise children with disabilities, and who usually will have to do the majority of the caring, sometimes for the rest of their lives. Often unable to return to work, no pension, worrying about what will happen when they die.

I have disabled twins and it’s the hardest thing I’ve ever done - they’re only 3 and the chances of them ever living independently are so small. I’m terrified.

How anyone can judge someone for wanting to know if this is their future is beyond me.

All of my twins’ screening was normal.

That test can cause women to terminate healthy babies.

Its already been said. What kind of test is that?

That just means that YOU are placing a hierarchy of deservingness(??) on some pople over others - which is surely what you are objecting to!

Im not placing anything on anyone

I want to pay taxes at a high enough level that all those who can’t support themselves (yes, even if it is “self-inflicted” through obesity ) get their needs met fully by the state - living costs and health needs and everything. So that women really have a choice about terminating a pregnancy, rather than some women feeling forced into a termination by risk of penury which is no choice at all.

I agree with Kittens that healthcare removal is a dystopian nightmare and I’m not going to sit around giving it credence by “debating” something so clearly abhorrent.

I am not totally anti abortion butI do worry about it effects how we see isability and quality of life. Screening can be helpful, it can help one prepare but it isn,t the be and end all. I mean my sister was told her baby might have had a condition incompatible with life, some might have aborted for that reason but turns out baby din't have that condition.

I haven’t read the whole thread but I had frequent scans I have a blood condition that means any babies may need inter vitro blood transfusions.

Some preparation for medical conditions need support at birth

Not everything to do with a scan is about whether to continue a pregnancy

I mean my sister was told her baby might have had a condition incompatible with life, some might have aborted for that reason but turns out baby din't have that condition.

Thats awful, and the reason I didn't have early bloods, etc. Many would have, and have, terminated healthy babies, which is shocking.

Smotheroffive you say that 'Thats awful, and the reason I didn't have early bloods, etc. Many would have, and have, terminated healthy babies, which is shocking.'

Do you have any sort of reference/data about healthy pregnancies being terminated solely based on a blood test result?