Would you (and your partner) consider abortion due to the possibility of birth defects?

[Teller]

What offended me the most is that the article praised those doctors who withheld vital information that parents should have to make their own choices in the matter...

Agreed.

Sincerely,

Virginia

[endzone_dave]

What offended me the most is that the article praised those doctors who withheld vital information that parents should have to make their own choices in the matter, and that states are starting to pass laws to protect these doctors from lawsuits if they withhold information that might lead to an abortion.

Where in the article did it say that?

[bcl05]

While it is clear that some doctors do withhold vital information intentionally (I've dealt with some of them, professionally, and think those that do are reprehensible) the article is awfully vague about the details in this particular case.

[NavyDave]

I applaud those who decided to bless the world with a new life, birth defects or not. There are those out there that can not or will not handle the responsibilities associated with raising a special needs child and that is their choice and right.

I could not considered aborting my child for that reason so it would had been left up to Mrs ND, who had her tubes tied after ND jr.

This topic brought back memories when I played Devil's advocate on this subject about testing for birth defects and included a hypothetical about also knowing the sexual preference of the unborn being a high probability of being gay and would it be okay for parent to abort for that reason.

[MisterPinstripe]

I cant imagine how hard it would be. But I also think it would be really selfish to end the childs life because it looks like they may be a special needs child. People can say that they wouldnt want to see the child go through a hard life, but the reality is they are most likely thinking of what they would have to go through.

[roanoker]

My wife and I had a child born with several defects and lifelong problems. It was and is tough attending to his needs, but we love him and he adds a lot to our lives. The only winner in the posted story is the attorney who picked up his 33% of the award.

[USS Redskins]

This story has haunted me for years.. its bad enough Hitler killed innocent Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals but he also wiped out 275,000 or more people (including children) with Downs Syndrome and other disabilities.

Here is the wiki page... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_T4

Imagine what Hitler could have accomplished with modern technology - he could have eliminated any physical defects before they were even out of the womb.

Modern Society is much more caring though today.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I cant imagine how hard it would be. But I also think it would be really selfish to end the childs life because it looks like they may be a special needs child. People can say that they wouldnt want to see the child go through a hard life, but the reality is they are most likely thinking of what they would have to go through.

I don't think that's fair to say at all.

[twa]

I don't think that's fair to say at all.

We could let the kid decide,I was lucky enough to have a mother that played the hand she was dealt despite expert opinion.

But you are right in that many only have good intentions

[TD_washingtonredskins]

We could let the kid decide,I was lucky enough to have a mother that played the hand she was dealt despite expert opinion.

But you are right in that many only have good intentions

sure...i was referring to only PM's implication that people are only making these types of decisions for selfish reasons. that's a pretty bold opinion given the classy posts in this thread so far.

[Renegade7]

My uncertainty revolves almost exclusively around my other two kids. If I was confronted with this decision with our first preganancy I'd probably be much more willing to say "no way would I give up a chance to be a father to this child."

Also, the financial situation again only really matters to me in how it impacts my other two kids...granted, I'm saying this without really knowing how much of impact it is. I'm making an assumption which might be pretty ignorant, but I wouldn't think it was necessarily fair to drain 529s and other savings accounts that were earmarked for my other two kids.

I'm sure everyone would be OK with the time and financial commitments it would take since we would all love the child unconditionally. I also know from volunteering with special needs children and adults that there is more than enough joy and plenty of "good times" involved. I just don't know how you weigh something as precious as your time with your children. I've seen family friends devote almost all of their resources in order to see modest improvements in their special needs children. I think that's an instinct that you can't turn off as a parent. But, you have to ask yourself if you really did your FAMILY a disservice in the long run I think. One family sends their other son to his grandparents' house 3-4 nights per week. That's fine and they are thankful for the help, but think about all the experiences they are missing with him...

I definitely understand where you're coming from, especially from a financial standpoint and how it effects the kids you already have. It does feel like this argument falls on deaf ears to some, especially when talking about regards to a teenager's financial situation as well. Parts of our society demand that this child have a child, then turn around and wonder why she isn't in college or confused she's dancing on a pole with two more kids before her mid-twenties. Good luck finding a college that lets a student live on campus with their kid.

EDIT: Interesting and worth sharing:

http://luvintkandtj.hubpages.com/hub/University-Family-Housing

[twa]

I've known a number of pole dancers with degrees, most of them did not have kids

I don't mind helping the mother/father of a special needs child...it's the normal kids/parents that act like a special needs child having their hand out that irritates me.

[MisterPinstripe]

I don't think that's fair to say at all.

Maybe, maybe not. I made sure to say most, and I do believe it is pretty accurate.

You know whats less fair then what I said? Aborting a baby because they are/could be flawed. Thats barbaric.

[twa]

Maybe, maybe not. I made sure to say most, and I do believe it is pretty accurate.

You know whats less fair then what I said? Aborting a baby because they are/could be flawed. Thats barbaric.

It is a odd reasoning some use,in that this clump of cells becomes a almost certain defective child that would be a burden.

If it is so certain at that point what that individual will be then why do we allow the termination of perfectly healthy ones at the same point?

Wouldn't it be more civilized to wait to determine level of care/burden and then terminate the defective burdens among us we (society) or the parents don't want to provide for?

Are we not pre-judging?

[gbear]

TWA, yes we prejudge. We all take a look at where we are in our lives and make choices based on the situations in which we find ourselves. The past and how we got to those situations plays only a small part in determining our course. We look around and judge what the best path is for us to take based on the information we have about where we are and where the paths will lead us.

A young couple has sex and the lady is pregnant. OK, from this point there is a decision to be made by all involved as to what happens next. Many would say a teen could/should abort to preserve their options going forward (even if few will openly advocate for the path). Many will also point to adoption or even forgoing college to raise a kid. As I see it, there are 3 common possible paths barring miscarriage.

Then comes the news of special needs. This changes the last 2 options rather drastically. Adoption is much less of an option as people mostly want healthy kids who look like them. This leaves raising a medically needy child. I submit that I think few people and even fewer couples are ready to deal with this situation. We can talk on a msg board about doing it, but I'd be terrified to do it alone. Of the kids we've taken care of (small sample), none of them had both parents in their lives, and the divorce rates amongst parents of medically fragile kids is incredibly high. Even the strongest of marriages I've seen going through it with their own kids are strained.

So now the likely scenarios are abortion (murder in many people's public eyes) or raising a medically fragile kid alone with all of the isolation that tends to entail. I hate both those options, but I can understand the motivation and logic behind taking either course. It's easy to say they had sex so they should soldier up and deal as best they can. I think it's also easy to say saving the lives of those already living in the way they are currently living is worth more in total than a fetus. Harsh and disgusting it is. Even "barbaric" seems appropriate at times. However, I can understand from a utilitarian stand point the decision to abort.

I am very glad my childrens' mothers did not. It's also why we tell our kids to be thankful for their birth families who were strong enough to have them and strong enough to realize they couldn't care for them and to put them in our care.

[twa]

Nice post gbear , but my point was more why not move the time for a decision to when matters are clearer?

Would it be barbaric or simply more sensible?

[gbear]

I think the issue there is logical result of our culture's Judeo-Christian heritage where a life has been defined as beginning at birth. Once born, we treat deliberate killing as murder. Before birth, our laws are more flexible. Birth is simply a point in development easily delineated.

Some would move the point to viability. The issue with leaving till a clearer picture is the time needed to assess the matters more clearly pushes people ever closer to a point thought of as murder. Even viability is a hazy prospect to determine because one has to determine how many resources are available. My son was a 26 weeker. The state paid a ton for him to be viable (Thank you MD taxpayer. I am in your debt). So as we wait to get a clear picture, we are moving towards murder. That invisible line we recognize only after we have crossed if ever we do know, is why people act before definite information is known.

[LadySkinsFan]

As conservatives move ever closer to "smaller government" where governors and legislatures curtail the amount of state monies that are devoted to state-funded medical care programs for the critically ill as is being done in Arizona for a start, who gets to choose who gets the money for survival? The conservatives are all about self-sufficiency and carrying enough insurance. The Affordable Care Act includes a more generous lifetime benefit that insurance companies have to provide.

So, are only the poor and those who don't have insurance the expendable ones? We all know that the rich can afford any kind of health care they wish to purchase, with or without insurance.

Should we put it to a vote about which people get medical services and which don't?

Some history, in the barbaric days, children who weren't perfect were left on hillsides to die, and the sick and old people were cast out to die. That was done for the good of the society, and for the gene pool actually, the old survival of the fittest. That's why so many of us prefer a public option, that is non-profit, where people needing medical services are seen as humans and not detractors to the bottom line for for-profit companies, and where the state may or may not provide needed medical services.

[twa]

Obama care and reproductives services....get some

gbear , we have already moved the point to viability w/exceptions

[Predicto]

For those on here who have children and decided not to do testing, or those who did testing and then had to decide, your answers are enlightening. Thank you.

For those of you who have not yet been in that situation, I'm not disrespecting you when I say that I am not sure that you actually know what you will do until you get there. These are monumental and wracking decisions.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Maybe, maybe not. I made sure to say most, and I do believe it is pretty accurate.

You know whats less fair then what I said? Aborting a baby because they are/could be flawed. Thats barbaric.

I tend to agree and have mentioned in this thread that my preferred approach would be to give up the child (adoption). Still, to assume you know that types of considerations that "most people" would put into a decision like that is extremely arrogant.

[endzone_dave]

My son came along unexpectantly about 10 years ago. That resulted in me living with my in-laws for two extra years and it ended up setting my wife's career back about 5 years. Neither was the end of the world but at the time, things seemed gloomy. Abortion was never an option.

Last night I went to the Wizards game with my son and had a blast. My son is the BEST thing that ever happened to me. I can't imagine many circumstances where aborting a child is better for the parent long-term.

[twa]

I can't imagine many circumstances where aborting a child is better for the parent long-term.

Depends on what you value, I can certainly see where it has made life easier for some to eliminate the bother and expense.

Same goes for pets to a lesser degree

add

LSF it wasn't that long ago my wife's grandmother wanted to leave her in the backroom to just die as a newborn...people do the darnedest things

Makes sense to them I guess

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Depends on what you value, I can certainly see where it has made life easier for some to eliminate the bother and expense.

Same goes for pets to a lesser degree

Or you could value the quality of life of your other children. I really don't get how this is such a binary decision for some people.

[Predicto]

My son came along unexpectantly about 10 years ago. That resulted in me living with my in-laws for two extra years and it ended up setting my wife's career back about 5 years. Neither was the end of the world but at the time, things seemed gloomy. Abortion was never an option.

Last night I went to the Wizards game with my son and had a blast. My son is the BEST thing that ever happened to me. I can't imagine many circumstances where aborting a child is better for the parent long-term.

Of course he is the best thing that ever happened to you.

And if you waited two years, and had a kid then, THAT kid would be the best thing that ever happened to you too.