Downs Syndrome and Abortion.

But that is murdering a child if parents have waited till just before birth. There are many opportunities to have tests done during pregnancy

Does anyone honestly think someone who is carrying a baby with abnormalities waits deliberately until the 39th week before terminating? Who on Earth would do that, with all the discomforts of late pregnancy and the stress of knowing that such an awful experience lay ahead?

Walk a mile in their shoes before judging.

It’s unfair and inflammatory to talk as though ‘murdering babies at birth’ has somehow been normalised or even legalised. It has not.
This is a difficult issue I thank the Judges fir their calm considered counsel

If only this world wasn't so hard to navigate when you are less than able and healthy

Plenty of posters realize the challenges of having health issues, dependency on others to live independently....

Imagine a lifetime of challenges and not everybody will make the same choices

Too much of a generalisation Philippa111 people with Downs have different personalities and problems just like everyone else.
Of late there have been a lot of people with Downs in the media one way and another. However they all function well, a lot of other people with Downs have a greater degree of learning impairment and other allied health conditions. Its not at all clear cut when you just say Down Syndrome.

could not obtain

What those who have brought this case have done is to present it in a way that most people would have qualms about.

By presenting it as babies aborted at birth , the picture in most people’s mind is of a viable full term baby who is killed before it is born.

This isn’t what happens in reality. The cut off age for termination is 24 weeks. In very exceptional circumstances such as the foetus is dying in the womb or will not survive after birth termination can be carried out later. There was a case in Ireland of a mother who died because she could not only brain a legal abortion of a dying foetus.

The family concerned in this case are opposed to termination of any kind. I respect their right to hold that point of view but I deplore the trickery of “termination at birth” in order to raise an outcry in public opinion.

this is the case btw as I was confused as to how it was a new law

www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/25/heidi-crowter-woman-downs-syndrome-loses-court-of-appeal-abortion-law-case

There are lots of conditions that cause profound disabilities that cannot be detected until 30+ weeks in pregnancy and obviously disabilities that cannot be detected at all.

I have worked with adults with Downs Syndrome. They are the most innocent and loving people I have ever met...and a joy to be around. I consider that it was a privilege to interact with them. Thy enriched my life and opened my heart.

There is a programme on BBC just now with the two main characters being Downs. They are part of our community. Other babies are born with other difficult things going on health wise.

But I respect that it is a hard job being a parent of a Downs child so I would never criticise a decision to not go ahead. But that is murdering a child if parents have waited till just before birth. There are many opportunities to have tests done during pregnancy.

I think this law is absolutely wrong and inhumane.

No one is murdering babies at birth. Prem babies receive absolutely the very best care possible once they are born. The decision a woman takes to terminate a pregnancy at any point should be hers and hers alone. It must be a heart breaking decision to take and no woman should be condemned for deciding that the quality of life for the baby she is carrying is not acceptable to her. Sometimes the most caring thing to do is to accept that life isn't possible.

This is an extremely emotive subject, and it is worth noting that the young lady with Downs, Heidi Crowter, was represented by lawyers with connections to fundamentalist right wing Christians according to a report by Jo Maugham of Good Law Project.

Due to my age, I had an amniocentesis test when pregnant with my DD after pre -tests showed a high risk of Downs Syndrome. Longest 10 days of our lives waiting for the results which were happily negative. I can't imagine what our lives would be like now with a 25 year old Downs adult, and the worry of what would happen when we die.

Many babies are born at 24 weeks duration and survive and do well. I think that is far too late to murder. They should take a long hard look at what is happening now and how they are able to save very prem babies. My granddaughter was very prem and she is now a healthy 17 year old and top of her year level in most subjects. I hate to think of her being murdered at birth.

You have always been able to terminate until term in the case of disability, it isn't a new thing.

One of my children has a severe disability which sounds very similar to Wyllow's grandchild and I'm uncomfortable with the rights of an unborn child being put before that of the woman who is carrying the child. I love my child very much but everything has been a battle, fighting against authorities is harder than coping with the disability but you have to do it, otherwise they receive inadequate education, care and health input. No one even cares about it either, if they did changes would have been made to make people's lives easier and less than stressful than they already are. It is always (generally) Mothers and women who bear the emotional brunt of all of it too

Thanks newmom for your post. The likelihood of a termination at 39 weeks is beyond rare.

Abortion is only legal up to 24 weeks.
After that date can only be carried out legally if the mother’s life is at risk or a child will be born severely disabled.
As has been previously mentioned only about 0.1% of all terminations are carried out over this date., and mostly to women over 35years.
I wouldn’t like to judge any women who finds herself with this terrible dilemma of having to abort a foetus at a later stage of pregnancy.

It is hard to contemplate that abortion is legal at term. I cannot think what is to be said about this. Surely this is not enshrined in law.

Totally conflicted, what quality of life is subjective.

As a teenager I knew a woman who worked with handicapped children and then had a Down's baby herself. He was a gorgeous little boy but she decided that she couldn't cope with one of he own and his grandparents took him.

Does anyone remember a novel published in the 60s about a woman with a Down's baby? I can't remember the title or author but it was based on her own experiences and the woman was insisting on giving up her baby because, although she loved him, there was so little help available to herif she kept him. I wonder if much has changed today?

I had amniocentesis with all three of my pregnancies because there were medical issues that made it necessary.
However I think the screening which is now carried out routinely will lead to an amniocentesis if results show a possible disability. And of course scans diagnose some problems, my sister in law’s baby was diagnosed with severe abnormalities incompatible with life when she 26 weeks pregnant and she went ahead with a termination, which of course was an induced birth at that stage.

I am happy there is choice for these cases - as a parent, you want the best for your child and depending on the severity, this could be it

It seems heartless, but I think it is worse compulsory condemning the child and family to a very difficult life, with no end in sigh for the suffering

My thoughts are with the parents who have to take this extremely difficult decision

As I understand it, only an amniocentesis or CVS can test for Down’s (and other) syndromes with certainty. The other tests are screening ones such as NIPT and they can only tell you the probability of a baby being affected. To know for sure, amnio or CVS would also have to be carried out.

What a wonderful outcome GrannyGravy and you clearly would have welcomed and loved your child whatever.
For myself, I decided before I became pregnant with my first child that I would not carry a baby to term if I knew it was seriously disabled. I knew I would be unable to care for and bring up such a child, but that I couldn’t abandon it either, and therefore for me, the best solution would have been termination. It didn’t happen anyway, but two of my babies were born with serious medical issues and required treatment and a stay in NICU. They both made complete recoveries and have grown into wonderful people, in my extremely biased opinion.

As do I.

these matters are not just about the parents (although of course they have to actually make the decisions).

Its resources too - unless the parents are very well off, the prospect of a lovely and caring care home provided by the state are far from realistic.

I have a very disabled DGD, who fortunately, tho nearly blind, learning disabled and with Cerebral palsy and epilepsy, has a good quality of life because her parent put enormous amounts of effort in, and can afford some private care at the moment as its all part time: but when she finishes school, we all know very well in the family that she will never live independently, she will need 24/7 care.

My DiL and DS never had the choice as she was oxygen deprived at birth and was doing OK until during Covid at age 6 she had major fits which then took away her sight. It has caused some issues for DGD's eldest brother because so much attention was needed by DGD.

I would never dream of asking DS and DiL "had you had the choice".

But here is the crux of the matter: were we a society that had adequate care home provision for those needing 24/7 lifelong care then their choices and their feelings might have varied a great deal. But we are not.

The options are really limited at the end of schooling years for daycare. However loving DS and DiL are, they will get old themselves.

We all live in the present, but I think my families experiences have made me feel that it needs to be an option for parents to weigh up what kind of life a child of theirs might have and what their limitations, emotionally, or financially, might be.

Thank you Newmon. I completely agree with you.

To put it into context of numbers, only 0.1% of abortions last year took place after 24 weeks. 87% were before 10 weeks. Women are not aborting fully formed, healthy babies.

I think the wording of the law confuses this issue a lot. No one is aborting a baby at 39 weeks. Legally, there is a right to allow a woman to should she find out that the baby would be seriously handicapped. But what happens is that women go for a scan between 20-22 weeks pregnant, they get bad news about the babies health and are then referred onto consultants for further tests to find out the viability and potential health complications. That can take another week or 2. Then there’s the time for the woman to make the decision and to terminate the pregnancy. So in some cases the termination (which is for medical reasons) can occur at over 24 weeks. But only because the baby would be seriously handicapped.

The law is there to protect and enable women to make an informed decision, with enough time. Most of these late abortions occur in women ages over 35 as well, so usually due to complications more likely to occur due to the mothers age and more often than not are much wanted babies. It must be a heartbreaking decision to make, but the alternative? Force women to carry a baby to term that will never have a good quality of life, or a baby that may die hours after birth? I would rather have the chance to end the pregnancy earlier than have to carry on knowing my child will suffer anyway.

SueDonim

Was that an amniocentesis test, GrannyGravy?

No, I declined an amniocentesis.

Once I felt movement that was it, fortunately DH supported my decision.