Poll: Would You Abort?

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: xSauronx
I dont think Down's Syndrome is necessarily bad enough to warrant an abortion, but I wouldnt blame anyone if they went that way.

Now I know this guy who had a pregnant wife, and it was discovered that the fetus had a serious defect or disease or something, and doctors repeatedly suggested abortion because the likelihood of the child living even *days* was very low.

They wouldnt, on religious grounds, and the wife went through with the pregnancy. The baby survived less than 24 hours. I would have pushed for abortion strongly on that for certain.

Why? It brought them comfort to know that they did everything they could to give that child a chance at life, and it cost them nothing but the physical impact of bringing a child to term. They may even have been comforted somewhat for having the opportunity to hold their child in their arms. Why, for people that experienced life in that particular way, would you push them to abort?

 

[datalink7]

I feel it is taking a life, so I would say no.

 

[roid450]

Originally posted by: princess ida

Amniocenteses :thumbsup:

I'd prolly decide to abort

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: RaistlinZ

Originally posted by: xSauronx
I dont think Down's Syndrome is necessarily bad enough to warrant an abortion, but I wouldnt blame anyone if they went that way.

Now I know this guy who had a pregnant wife, and it was discovered that the fetus had a serious defect or disease or something, and doctors repeatedly suggested abortion because the likelihood of the child living even *days* was very low.

They wouldnt, on religious grounds, and the wife went through with the pregnancy. The baby survived less than 24 hours. I would have pushed for abortion strongly on that for certain.

I bet they're still glad they didn't choose abortion. At least they were able to let the child go on God's terms, not some doctor's.

And did they pay for the tens of thousands of extra dollars in tests and care that allowing this doomed birth to go forward cost, or did their insurance company, meaning, finally, everyone else?

In order to still make a profit, did their insurance company DENY someone else an expensive experimental procedure which might at least have had a chance of saving that person's life?

NONE of these decisions are made in some personal, zero cost, praise Yahweh vacuum.

Aww, Perky, you can't place a monetary value on a life without seriously degrading society. That old person who needs $60,000 in treatment to make it through next week but then may have another two or three years to live, do they get treated? What about the 50 year old with a heart attack requiring high cost emergency room care? What about me, who can live probably another 60 years with treatment or maybe 15 without, but where the treatment (without insurance) is $35-75k a year?

Who makes the determination on which life has more value? How do you get job training for a role where you play God?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: princess ida
Are the screenings really that accurate these days?

A friend has a Down's kid. He's not a vegetable. You never really know what kind of child you're going to get. And what if the testing was wrong?

quite accurate. And no, Down's kids are not vegetables, and can lead very productive lives with the proper rearing, but it takes extreme patience and unwavering love and support.

You pretty much have to join a community of fellow Down's parents for the support. Parents of Down's kids go through a range of emotions and real difficulties, oftentimes feelings you never thought you would be capable of. Any parent will tell you that you sacrifice a lot of who you are in raising kids. Raising one with a developmental disability is another level entirely.

 

[EGGO]

I would ask about adoption options first.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Proprioceptive

Originally posted by: darkxshade

Originally posted by: Proprioceptive
Text

This kid is living proof that down syndrome cannot, in my opinion, be a factor in considering an abortion.

For every one success story, there are probably hundreds if not thousands more that's proof that it should be a factor in considering abortion.

This is true... but in my opinion... I just can't take that chance.

Fair enough. But you'd have to be confident that you can raise that kid the way his parents did. It ain't easy...

 

[lxskllr]

I'm not sure. I miss when my girl was very young and simple. There's something to be said for having a perpetual child. It would be a lot of work, but it could be very rewarding in it's own way.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: lxskllr
I'm not sure. I miss when my girl was very young and simple. There's something to be said for having a perpetual child. It would be a lot of work, but it could be very rewarding in it's own way.

It gets to be a more complex case when you think that you will pass and your kid will be in this world without you, living as a perpetual child.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Proprioceptive

Originally posted by: darkxshade

Originally posted by: Proprioceptive
Text

This kid is living proof that down syndrome cannot, in my opinion, be a factor in considering an abortion.

For every one success story, there are probably hundreds if not thousands more that's proof that it should be a factor in considering abortion.

This is true... but in my opinion... I just can't take that chance.

Fair enough. But you'd have to be confident that you can raise that kid the way his parents did. It ain't easy...

I think part of the gamble of becoming a parent is being willing to still be there if your child is great, difficult, serious trouble, disabled or gets in a life-altering accident. It's not something I can do personally, and so I choose not to have kids. However, if you're going to willingly step into that role as a parent, it should be everything that marriage vows aren't: for better or for worse, in sickness or in health.

I have a friend who was in a terrible car accident in college and was left disabled, about the state of a 4 year old, for the rest of his life. His mom continues to love and care for him nonetheless, and when it was uncertain whether he would make it she begged God that he would pull through. He's a happy guy, even though he's a different person than he was before.

Life is uncertain; you could abort every imperfect fetus that comes along until you have your perfect kid and still not have a guarantee life is going to go the way you want or expect. That commitment to being a parent doesn't come with an out clause if your kids get damaged.

 

[zinfamous]

Oh, another thing to consider about Down's that most people don't know: typical life span is ~35 years. Down's carries with it a developmental defect in the mesoderm that leads to a severely weakened heart. Many Down's patients die much younger than 35 due to this.

If it's worth it to you to bring a child to that age and go through it, then more power to you. But it is something you should always consider. In the end, it all boils down to how well you know yourself, if you can deal with the inevitable range of emotions such as anger and guilt towards yourself and your partner (you WILL blame your spouse for these disorders-it's natural, so you just have to expect it).

I've read many a testamonial from such parents that were completely shocked and mortified by the types of feelings they went through. This kid will completely change your life, and so it's not unusual to project a bit of hatred towards your own child.

Again, anyone who feels they are up to it should charge ahead.

 

[Miramonti]

Down's kids are some of the most loving people on earth.

However that's not necessarily the question here....

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
now this is going to get real personal. i can understand if you don't want to answer. what if you were that down's syndrome fetus? what would you want to happen to you?

Like I mentioned before, this is really delving into some deep philosophical questions about life and when it begins.

If you don't believe life begins at conception, then the question is moot. Something that isn't self-aware or doesn't possess consciousness can't care if they're born or not.

Also, I think asking any person (Down's Syndrome or not) whether they're happy they weren't aborted is disingenuous for similar reasons.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: moshquerade
late term abortion if it got to that point, or would that change your decision?

It might. Psychologically, it's a lot easier to recommend abortion early in a pregnancy. 88% of abortions are done before the 13th week; only 1.5% are done after the 21st week.

The difference between first and second trimester abortions is the difference between recommending the abortion of this vs. this. It has a lot to do with your view on life and when it begins (which I think is a personal decision).

what if your wife was opposed to your recommendation? would it be cause for divorce if she had the child?

Of course not.

now this is going to get real personal. i can understand if you don't want to answer. what if you were that down's syndrome fetus? what would you want to happen to you?

impossible to answer, and you know that.

Now why would you ask such a ludicrously irrelevant question?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: xSauronx
I dont think Down's Syndrome is necessarily bad enough to warrant an abortion, but I wouldnt blame anyone if they went that way.

Now I know this guy who had a pregnant wife, and it was discovered that the fetus had a serious defect or disease or something, and doctors repeatedly suggested abortion because the likelihood of the child living even *days* was very low.

They wouldnt, on religious grounds, and the wife went through with the pregnancy. The baby survived less than 24 hours. I would have pushed for abortion strongly on that for certain.

Why? It brought them comfort to know that they did everything they could to give that child a chance at life, and it cost them nothing but the physical impact of bringing a child to term. They may even have been comforted somewhat for having the opportunity to hold their child in their arms. Why, for people that experienced life in that particular way, would you push them to abort?

but the thing is, they never could do anything to give that child a chance at life. They falsely believed such would happen.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they were wrong to carry through with it--that's their decision. But when faced with a known still birth/child that will die within a few days, it becomes, in my mind, masochistic to bring to term.

In these cases though, there is often a threat to the mother, if not terminal but the potential for sterility in the future. That risk is in no way worth bringing a terminal illness into the world. You effectively end the potential for life, which is anathema to the "right to life under all circumstances" idea.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: RaistlinZ

Originally posted by: xSauronx
I dont think Down's Syndrome is necessarily bad enough to warrant an abortion, but I wouldnt blame anyone if they went that way.

Now I know this guy who had a pregnant wife, and it was discovered that the fetus had a serious defect or disease or something, and doctors repeatedly suggested abortion because the likelihood of the child living even *days* was very low.

They wouldnt, on religious grounds, and the wife went through with the pregnancy. The baby survived less than 24 hours. I would have pushed for abortion strongly on that for certain.

I bet they're still glad they didn't choose abortion. At least they were able to let the child go on God's terms, not some doctor's.

Did they blame God for their child's disease? If they didn't...why wouldn't they?

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: moshquerade
late term abortion if it got to that point, or would that change your decision?

It might. Psychologically, it's a lot easier to recommend abortion early in a pregnancy. 88% of abortions are done before the 13th week; only 1.5% are done after the 21st week.

The difference between first and second trimester abortions is the difference between recommending the abortion of this vs. this. It has a lot to do with your view on life and when it begins (which I think is a personal decision).

what if your wife was opposed to your recommendation? would it be cause for divorce if she had the child?

Of course not.

now this is going to get real personal. i can understand if you don't want to answer. what if you were that down's syndrome fetus? what would you want to happen to you?

impossible to answer, and you know that.

Now why would you ask such a ludicrously irrelevant question?

How is that impossible to answer?
It's totally relevant and, I'll answer it right now. Of course, I would want to live.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: xSauronx
I dont think Down's Syndrome is necessarily bad enough to warrant an abortion, but I wouldnt blame anyone if they went that way.

Now I know this guy who had a pregnant wife, and it was discovered that the fetus had a serious defect or disease or something, and doctors repeatedly suggested abortion because the likelihood of the child living even *days* was very low.

They wouldnt, on religious grounds, and the wife went through with the pregnancy. The baby survived less than 24 hours. I would have pushed for abortion strongly on that for certain.

Why? It brought them comfort to know that they did everything they could to give that child a chance at life, and it cost them nothing but the physical impact of bringing a child to term. They may even have been comforted somewhat for having the opportunity to hold their child in their arms. Why, for people that experienced life in that particular way, would you push them to abort?

but the thing is, they never could do anything to give that child a chance at life. They falsely believed such would happen.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they were wrong to carry through with it--that's their decision. But when faced with a known still birth/child that will die within a few days, it becomes, in my mind, masochistic to bring to term.

In these cases though, there is often a threat to the mother, if not terminal but the potential for sterility in the future. That risk is in no way worth bringing a terminal illness into the world. You effectively end the potential for life, which is anathema to the "right to life under all circumstances" idea.

I think, specific to the bolded circumstances, that this is highly personal and variable. For some couples having the chance to see and hold their child to say goodbye might be comforting. For others, it might bring more pain to an already unbearably painful situation. I think the question of "which is less painful" is s something that nobody but the parents involved can answer.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: moshquerade
late term abortion if it got to that point, or would that change your decision?

It might. Psychologically, it's a lot easier to recommend abortion early in a pregnancy. 88% of abortions are done before the 13th week; only 1.5% are done after the 21st week.

The difference between first and second trimester abortions is the difference between recommending the abortion of this vs. this. It has a lot to do with your view on life and when it begins (which I think is a personal decision).

what if your wife was opposed to your recommendation? would it be cause for divorce if she had the child?

Of course not.

now this is going to get real personal. i can understand if you don't want to answer. what if you were that down's syndrome fetus? what would you want to happen to you?

impossible to answer, and you know that.

Now why would you ask such a ludicrously irrelevant question?

How is that impossible to answer?
It's totally relevant and, I'll answer it right now. Of course, I would want to live.

Its completely irrelavent because its impossible to be "in the shoes" of a fetus.

Its like asking, put yourself in the shoes of a guy who was in a coma for 40 years and is about to get his life support cut. How would you feel at that exact moment?

Can you answer that question? No. Because a fetus or a person who was in a coma for 40 years isn't able to make the thought processes necessary to thinking, "I don't really want to die"

I regard the personalization argument as a last ditch argument, it tries too hard to cater to a persons "feelings" instead of looking at the facts

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: tenshodo13

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: moshquerade
late term abortion if it got to that point, or would that change your decision?

It might. Psychologically, it's a lot easier to recommend abortion early in a pregnancy. 88% of abortions are done before the 13th week; only 1.5% are done after the 21st week.

The difference between first and second trimester abortions is the difference between recommending the abortion of this vs. this. It has a lot to do with your view on life and when it begins (which I think is a personal decision).

what if your wife was opposed to your recommendation? would it be cause for divorce if she had the child?

Of course not.

now this is going to get real personal. i can understand if you don't want to answer. what if you were that down's syndrome fetus? what would you want to happen to you?

impossible to answer, and you know that.

Now why would you ask such a ludicrously irrelevant question?

How is that impossible to answer?
It's totally relevant and, I'll answer it right now. Of course, I would want to live.

Its completely irrelavent because its impossible to be "in the shoes" of a fetus.

Its like asking, put yourself in the shoes of a guy who was in a coma for 40 years and is about to get his life support cut. How would you feel at that exact moment?

Can you answer that question? No. Because a fetus or a persona who was in a coma for 40 years isn't able to make the thought processes necessary to thinking, "I don't really want to die"

I was probably pinning him down with that question, and that is why i said i could understand if he didn't want to answer. But still, there is nothing wrong with looking at things from the other side of the fence. Sometimes it widens your perspective.

As far as the guy in a coma for 40 years who is about to get his life support cut off... if it were me I'd hope they let me go years before that. See, we can put ourselves in other's shoes.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: RaistlinZ

Originally posted by: xSauronx
I dont think Down's Syndrome is necessarily bad enough to warrant an abortion, but I wouldnt blame anyone if they went that way.

Now I know this guy who had a pregnant wife, and it was discovered that the fetus had a serious defect or disease or something, and doctors repeatedly suggested abortion because the likelihood of the child living even *days* was very low.

They wouldnt, on religious grounds, and the wife went through with the pregnancy. The baby survived less than 24 hours. I would have pushed for abortion strongly on that for certain.

I bet they're still glad they didn't choose abortion. At least they were able to let the child go on God's terms, not some doctor's.

And did they pay for the tens of thousands of extra dollars in tests and care that allowing this doomed birth to go forward cost, or did their insurance company, meaning, finally, everyone else?

In order to still make a profit, did their insurance company DENY someone else an expensive experimental procedure which might at least have had a chance of saving that person's life?

NONE of these decisions are made in some personal, zero cost, praise Yahweh vacuum.

Aww, Perky, you can't place a monetary value on a life without seriously degrading society. That old person who needs $60,000 in treatment to make it through next week but then may have another two or three years to live, do they get treated? What about the 50 year old with a heart attack requiring high cost emergency room care? What about me, who can live probably another 60 years with treatment or maybe 15 without, but where the treatment (without insurance) is $35-75k a year?

Who makes the determination on which life has more value? How do you get job training for a role where you play God?

And the problem is, you are in SERIOUS denial and lying to yourself if you don't think that, we, society, do it every single day, all day long.

Road and traffic engineers place an actual monetary value on a human life, so that they can arrive at the most safety for the buck, which nevertheless absolutely means that some will die who did not have to die if the cost were no object.

The EPA, and we, who give it only X amount of funding, do it in every ACCEPTABLE level of pollution that we allow, which, again, means that some human beings will die who did not have to die if the cost were no object.

WE, and YOU are not exempt my friend, consign some people to die because we do NOT have infinite resources. Just because you can't SEE these people right in front of you and haven't given them a name, does not mean that this does not happen.

When you allow that family the otherwise loving opportunity to bring their DOOMED TO A SHORT AND PAINFUL life child to term, the money that society, that YOU and I decide to spend on that is taken away, like I said, perhaps from a person who could have had a chancy but experimental medical procedure and lived.

YOU CAN'T PRETEND THAT YOU DON'T MAKE THESE CHOICES when you help structure a society this way and not that way, because . . . you . . . do.

 

[Nightfall]

I would leave the decision up to my wife, but I would recommend abortion in the case of down syndrome.

 

[jpeyton]

Have most people here seen Gattaca?

 

[imported_Imp]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Have most people here seen Gattaca?

It took me years to realize that the moral of the story was that you could be anything you wanted, and not that you are your genes.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: RaistlinZ

Originally posted by: xSauronx
I dont think Down's Syndrome is necessarily bad enough to warrant an abortion, but I wouldnt blame anyone if they went that way.

Now I know this guy who had a pregnant wife, and it was discovered that the fetus had a serious defect or disease or something, and doctors repeatedly suggested abortion because the likelihood of the child living even *days* was very low.

They wouldnt, on religious grounds, and the wife went through with the pregnancy. The baby survived less than 24 hours. I would have pushed for abortion strongly on that for certain.

I bet they're still glad they didn't choose abortion. At least they were able to let the child go on God's terms, not some doctor's.

And did they pay for the tens of thousands of extra dollars in tests and care that allowing this doomed birth to go forward cost, or did their insurance company, meaning, finally, everyone else?

In order to still make a profit, did their insurance company DENY someone else an expensive experimental procedure which might at least have had a chance of saving that person's life?

NONE of these decisions are made in some personal, zero cost, praise Yahweh vacuum.

Aww, Perky, you can't place a monetary value on a life without seriously degrading society. That old person who needs $60,000 in treatment to make it through next week but then may have another two or three years to live, do they get treated? What about the 50 year old with a heart attack requiring high cost emergency room care? What about me, who can live probably another 60 years with treatment or maybe 15 without, but where the treatment (without insurance) is $35-75k a year?

Who makes the determination on which life has more value? How do you get job training for a role where you play God?

And the problem is, you are in SERIOUS denial and lying to yourself if you don't think that, we, society, do it every single day, all day long.

Road and traffic engineers place an actual monetary value on a human life, so that they can arrive at the most safety for the buck, which nevertheless absolutely means that some will die who did not have to die if the cost were no object.

The EPA, and we, who give it only X amount of funding, do it in every ACCEPTABLE level of pollution that we allow, which, again, means that some human beings will die who did not have to die if the cost were no object.

WE, and YOU are not exempt my friend, consign some people to die because we do NOT have infinite resources. Just because you can't SEE these people right in front of you and haven't given them a name, does not mean that this does not happen.

When you allow that family the otherwise loving opportunity to bring their DOOMED TO A SHORT AND PAINFUL life child to term, the money that society, that YOU and I decide to spend on that is taken away, like I said, perhaps from a person who could have had a chancy but experimental medical procedure and lived.

YOU CAN'T PRETEND THAT YOU DON'T MAKE THESE CHOICES when you help structure a society this way and not that way, because . . . you . . . do.

Perknose in the last batch of threads I find myself agreeing with you almost every time.

You just told the truth.

An over abundance of "precious life" people are in this thread that ignore the cold hard facts of society.

I have personally watched people suffer because they couldn't afford or insurance wouldn't cover costly treatments. It's made me sick but it's the world we live in.

Sometimes people spend 100's of thousands of dollars on futile pre-natal, NICU care that would be enough to save maybe 100 lives. They are tough decisions but obviously those who can afford the care get it and those who can't do not...

I wish we could all have top notch medical care, but as I also know, society is not going to make those choices.