Campaign to remove prenatal tests

[Wondermule]

Posting in Feminism as from what I can see AIBU can get really nasty. I read this article a few weeks ago and it’s been playing on my mind ever since.

www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/26/ken-ross-disabled-person-as-famous-as-brad-pitt-on-screen-down-syndrome

Has the Guardian really given column inches to a MAN who is lobbying for prenatal tests to be withheld from women?! Not only that, it seems to be painting him in quite a positive light about it all!

Just posting for other’s opinions really.

I'd have a smidgeon more sympathy for his opinion if he had secured decent funding and facilities for disabled people and their carers.

That sounds very promising Buffster glad he is making good progress.

@notyourhandmaid

“Why do you need to know if your baby is going to have Down syndrome or not?”

Because it's really fucking hard raising a kid with special needs and there is never enough support or money, and it's all way more basic and everyday and pragmatic than 'valuing lives'.

I would put good money on this guy's wife doing 95% of the caring here.

This ^^

Man had an ‘epiphany’ and wants to dictate to women they must all follow his new beliefs so that he feels his child is valued

Why do I need to know?

Because it's my body, my information, my uterus, my health, my life, my decision and my informed choice.

Men who argue "withhold that woman's medical information from her so that she cannot make an informed decision, and ensure society facilitates the option to criminalise her for making decisions about her body that I want to prevent"
do not see women as full autonomous human beings.

No woman should ever be criminalised for any decision she makes about her own body and her own health. Her reasons need not be offered up for the scrutiny and approval of others.

The question is not
"why do women need to know?"

The question is
"Why do people feel they are entitled to oversight of a woman's decisions about her pregnancy?"
and
"Why do people wish to prevent, criminalise and punish women for exercising bodily autonomy for ANY REASON?"

@Barracker

The question is not "why do women need to know?"

The question is
"Why do people feel they are entitled to oversight of a woman's decisions about her pregnancy?"
and
"Why do people wish to prevent, criminalise and punish women for exercising bodily autonomy for ANY REASON?"

Playing Devil’s advocate here, but in China they will not tell you the sex of your child. The sonographer knows but will not tell you.

This is obviously to prevent aborting a female fetus. I have to say, I don’t disagree with this at all. Don’t forget that girls were once considered a burden to raise in China (though that’s fast changing for many reasons I won’t go into)

I just popped onto his Twitter page, he is advocating for termination rights in Northern Ireland to be rolled back as well. You know, the rights they only won a couple of years ago!! And it seems the DUP have taken note (no surprise there):

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-politics-56041850

I can’t upload a photo maybe because I’m new, but here is a cut and paste of one of his quotes:

I still maintain that there isn’t a need to screen for Down syndrome. It is not a life threatening or life limiting ‘illness’ - the screening programme is a convenient ‘absolute diagnosis’ misrepresented by those who still think they have an inherent right to value life!

I suppose we will have to wait and see what the English court makes of it later in the year.

It is not a life threatening or life limiting ‘illness

I know someone who lost their downs child as a toddler due to the many co morbid health conditions. It was extremely life limiting for the child.

I had the nipt test as an older mum. I would've terminated my pregnancy.

I would very much back a campaign for more visibility for people with disabilities and much, much more support for them and their families to lead meaningful, stress free lives. I suspect we would find that a world which embraced the existence of people with disabilities would be a better world all round, for everyone. However, I don't think this issue is quite synonymous with sex selective abortion.

The implications for a society where males outnumber females by a large amount are bad for the males, who find there is far more competition to find a mate, and (even more) extremely dangerous for the females.

It would be possible to argue that a society without congenital disability would be less rich, but it wouldn't be actually dangerous for half the population.
.
I am not surprised at all by the Guardian's reporting this without any concern. It is a good example of a certain type of thinking that is becoming more prevalent. I find this really hard to express and hope somebody else will come along and help....

Basically it seems as if perfectly reasonable statements such as "People with congenital disabilities have a right to a meaningful life" or "Gay men can make great parents" get used to extrapolate wild conclusions such as "Women should not be allowed to screen for congenital conditions" and "Gay men have a right to a baby born by surrogate mother".

Is there a term for this type of argument or thought process? I'm trying to think of other examples and wonder if there are any that don't carry the undercurrent of misogyny?

I suppose this is 'disability rights' getting out of hand and forgetting the majority have a valid view too. I had all the pre-natal tests going as I know the strain on a family of caring for a child with 'severe issues' - I phrased it like that as I don't know what the current pc expression is.

Disability rights don't go far enough, in my opinion. But it is a weird kind of backwards thinking which takes something valid and then retrofits it to deny women bodily autonomy and the choice to avoid physical, financial, relational and emotional difficulties in a society which does little to help.

Playing Devil’s advocate here, but in China they will not tell you the sex of your child. The sonographer knows but will not tell you.

This is obviously to prevent aborting a female fetus. I have to say, I don’t disagree with this at all.

I do disagree with this. It still amounts to "we'll punish women who fail to use their bodies in the way the state dictates. It's all for the good of their own sex, so they must use their bodies to serve the greater good, not themselves."
Either a woman has autonomy over her own pregnancy or she does not.

Anything else amounts to a selective justification for "a woman must be forced to continue her unwanted pregnancy against her will, under threat of criminal punishment."

If a woman has real autonomy over her own body, there is no reason in the world that she can be prevented from making her own informed choice about her pregnancy.

Women cannot purchase better rights for our sex or ensure girls are better valued by society by submitting to the removal of our own bodily autonomy.

It's a paradox to think that the way forward for women and girls to be valued as full, autonomous, valuable people is by removing their bodily sovereignty under threat of criminal sanctions, so that we can be forced to produce children we don't want.

I was with him all the way till I read Ross ... is lobbying parliament to remove the NHS screening on grounds that it is prejudicial.

That boils my blood. To hell with men who want to remove a woman's right to make decisions concerning her life and body, including her pregnancy.

The issue of banning medical terminations beyond term was discussed on woman’s hour recently. A lady very eloquently explained that if the court rules you can discriminate against a fetus, then fetuses essentially have a ‘personhood’ and this will lead to essentially all terminations being problematic (as well as women being blamed for things that go wrong in pregnancy). So it’s a much wider issue than Down syndrome.

As it stands this isn’t about ‘disability rights’ as fetuses don’t have human rights - if that makes sense.

Wendy, I know what you mean but I can’t think of a word for it either! Hopefully someone will enlighten us.

I do disagree with this. It still amounts to "we'll punish women who fail to use their bodies in the way the state dictates. It's all for the good of their own sex, so they must use their bodies to serve the greater good, not themselves.

It’s fine for you to have this opinion, but you should also recognise that things that make sense on an individual level could have negative societal consequences.

Either a woman has autonomy over her own pregnancy or she does not

Errr .... very few places allow a woman to terminate pregnancy for any reason at any point in the pregnancy. Everywhere has restrictions to some degree so that doesn’t hold water. (You might and probably will say that women should be able to terminate for any reason at any time, but this isn’t the reality in most places, so is kind of irrelevant).

I guess one could argue that a fetus with Downs should have the same protection as a healthy fetus, ie no termination after 24 weeks in the UK (12 weeks in much of Europe). But good luck getting that passed, the overwhelming majority of women choose to terminate, even where there is a lot of financial support.

@MangoFeverDream do you have a disabled child? I can tell you now there are plenty of circumstances where bringing a child with multiple needs up is not something to be taken lightly. Very few people are willing to adopt either so that's not a practical solution.

People think they are pro life but they often don't think what kind of life their idealistic ideas would lead to.

Mango, the benefit to the disabled community of knowing that more disabled people are being born out there somewhere, will never match the individual detriment to the mother forced to raise a disabled child.

In fact I believe it would be detrimental to the disabled community - less resources to go round, a lot of resentful parents damaging the positive image of parenting a disabled child, a lot of disabled children in care (who I believe are less likely to be adopted than able bodied children).

But my primary concern is that this issue will ‘take off’ in the way many issues have in recent years. All threats to women’s rights are to be taken seriously given the last few years.

MangoFeverDream I am arguing the case for women's rights as I believe they should be, rather than defeated resignation to the way things are currently.

You used the phrase "things that make sense on an individual level could have negative societal consequences."

For me, bodily autonomy is an uncrossable line. Sovereignty over one's own individual body is the most fundamental human right. The alternative is a form of slavery and subjugation. I'll never accept the principle of diminishing a person's autonomy over their own body - with associated criminal sanctions - for a purported societal good.

Women do not owe an unwilling sacrifice of their bodily autonomy to the state, to men, to women, to girls. It isn't a resource for others to exploit for any agenda.

Women do not owe an unwilling sacrifice of their bodily autonomy to the state, to men, to women, to girls.

I believe this stems from the sexist idea that women are benevolent, nurturing creatures that exist to please others, while men are entitled to personal ambition and self determination.

[quote TheBuffster]@MangoFeverDream do you have a disabled child? I can tell you now there are plenty of circumstances where bringing a child with multiple needs up is not something to be taken lightly. Very few people are willing to adopt either so that's not a practical solution.

People think they are pro life but they often don't think what kind of life their idealistic ideas would lead to.[/quote]
I was only playing devil’s advocate here (I thought that was clear...), I’d actually never choose to knowingly have a child with Downs, nor do I agree that the testing should be limited at all

@Barracker

MangoFeverDream I am arguing the case for women's rights as I believe they should be, rather than defeated resignation to the way things are currently.

You used the phrase "things that make sense on an individual level could have negative societal consequences."

For me, bodily autonomy is an uncrossable line. Sovereignty over one's own individual body is the most fundamental human right. The alternative is a form of slavery and subjugation. I'll never accept the principle of diminishing a person's autonomy over their own body - with associated criminal sanctions - for a purported societal good.

Women do not owe an unwilling sacrifice of their bodily autonomy to the state, to men, to women, to girls. It isn't a resource for others to exploit for any agenda.

Ok but you are arguing from a position that is ideological and not based on reality as it currently stands. We have the 24-week limit for healthy infants, I can see how unfair it might feel to a high-functioning person with Downs.

But .... I wouldn’t want to be forced to have a child with special needs, selfish as that sounds. I’ve seen how difficult that can be to manage up close and women usually have to act as carers

Highfalutinlootin
I don't care if people think this is immoral: if women were not able to abort fetuses with genetic abnormalities and conditions incompatible with life, then I will support infanticide. No woman should be forced to carry or raise a child she doesn't want, full stop. This would only lead to more disabled children and families in traffic situations and drains on institutional resources. I'm very sick of men telling women their opinions on what women should do with their bodies

Wow. You support the killing of live babies with Down syndrome? I hope you don't become like one of the parents who don't end up killing their own child.

If I'd know my child had autism, I wouldn't have hesitated to terminate the pregnancy

Make sure your autistic child doesn't read this (even if you may think it).Do you love him/her?

“Why do you need to know if your baby is going to have Down syndrome or not?”

From someone who will never be pregnant or give birth. Knob. End.

@secular39 how very judgemental of you. It's possible to love your disabled child whilst realising it makes life incredibly hard. I'd suggest you read something like 'special' which tells the watts and all stories of parents of disabled children, we're normal people in extreme circumstances, we're allowed to have human emotions and not to be strong all the time.