Feelings Amniocentesis Results...

[waxing lyrical]

To the OP, I can''t say I''m surprised by someone openly admitting they would terminate in such a situation. A very high number of Ds babies are terminated. It''s even higher with the fatal trisomies and NTDs.

I wanted to add to my previous post. If it was discovered at the 25 week u/s that DS had fatal abnormalities we would have continued on with the pregnancy and hoped for the best. After a certain point I knew there were problems. My instinct was right, but I didn''t know how severe those problems were. If we had known sooner what his outcome was going to be I would have consented to weekly BPPs and NSTs and if at whatever point he scored low I would have opted to induce labor to have moments with him alive. But, that''s in hindsight. I would have preferred that route if we had known ahead of time. Terminating is not an option, even though his case of Down Syndrome was more uncommon and severe. The mothers I know that have lost babies to the trisomies or other chromosomal conditions wouldn''t change or take back the time they spent with their precious babies. We would have fully welcomed another Ds baby into our family this time. Our only hope was that this baby not have the same complications. We recognize our situation is not average or common concerning T21. I can''t say we were nervous this time. We would much rather have a living, breathing baby than a dead baby. If that baby had Ds then so be it.

 

[waxing lyrical]

Serial posting. Blah.

What''s a "severe" disability? I''d like to know. Everyone''s understanding or idea of "severe" is different. Just concerning T21, there''s a wide spectrum with more severe cases being less common. I have friends who have babies/children with Ds that thrive and experience mild problems. I know some who have babies with moderate problems. They are all unique. Roughly 40-50% are born with a CHD, but babies without a trisomy are born with a CHDs.

I think what was hard for me was seeing other people with babies and children doing well. Many attending regular preschool and grade school. No serious problems at all. There''s a wide spectrum when it comes to Ds. I know there''s an extremely lack of proper education and knowledge concerning Ds. Not many educate themselves on it or associate with people with the condition.

Also, the trisomies and NTDs aren''t the only conditions associated with fatal or severe abnormalities. Some aren''t detected ''til later and some go undetected.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

Date: 7/24/2009 5:47:28 PM
Author: Pandora II
DH and I discussed this in detail before we got married as it was an issue that was very important to both of us.

When I got pregnant with Daisy we talked to the geneticists about doing CVS if the numbers came back indicating a high risk after the NT scan. We would definitely have terminated for any major chromosomal abnormality.

I always find it odd when people say that they wouldn''t terminate whatever the results - amnio and CVS don''t just test for Down''s - they also test for other trisomies, some of which are far more catastrophic than Down''s. I could not bring a pregnancy to term knowing that the baby would either die at or shortly after birth and suffer pain in that time just because I didn''t want to make a difficult decision.

Both DH and I have a number of genetic conditions which make life hard enough and we wouldn''t want to bring a special needs child into the world and certainly not a child who might suffer horribly and have no quality of life. My doctors discussed with me what I would do and were I think relieved by my attitude - they were all of a mind that bringing up a special needs child would not be in my best interests healthwise.

Obviously things can happen to a child later in life - accidents etc that mean that you are looking after a child with disabilities, and there is always that chance of not spotting something amiss before the birth - in which case, I would do everything possible to make the most of the situation and the best life for my child.

My reason for doing CVS is that you can find out so much earlier than amnio - and get the results back faster. Terminating at 12 weeks is a very different thing from terminating at 20+ weeks.

In the event, the NT results were so incredibly good that we chose not to have either CVS or amnio.

If you have thought seriously about these issues and formed a decision for yourself then I think it''s remarkably easy to be definite and matter of fact about it. It doesn''t mean that it would be any less devastating if it were to happen.

Pandora,

It''s not uncommon for people to find it "odd" when a family chooses to bring their child into the world when the child has special needs these days, because of the testing and screenings this thread speaks of. However, for those people who opt *not* to abort, it''s not about the abnormalities their child has, it''s about the fact/belief that a life is a life and that all people have the right to live, and to enjoy life to whatever capacity they can. I believe a LOT is to be said for the parents out there who have children with special needs... they don''t regret having their children, and children (even if they''re ill or not fully developed in some areas, to whatever extent it extends within them) have the capacity to experience love, to bring joy and to have joy. So, to say that a person/family who opted *not* to have an abortion is most certainly NOT avoiding "making a difficult decision," but is actually making a very strong decision in support of the life of their child.

It''s not about parents copping out and not wanting to "make a decision" that could be hard (it would literally KILL me to kill my child!!... so that would in fact be the most difficult decision of my life, and is one I will never make), but rather is about a person/family making the choice to bring the child they conceived into this world, to love and care for. Taking care of your child is always a decision someone makes.

 

[steph72276]

Fisher, lovely post and I agree 100%. It is not about copping out and not making a difficult decision. When you have strong feelings that that baby inside your womb is a life from conception, then terminating the pregnancy is the same to me as ending the baby''s life after delivery. So if you feel that way, it is not odd in any way to not feel like you can end it''s life inside the womb.

 

[Pandora II]

Sorry I probably didn''t make the highlighted section clear - I''m talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.

What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

 

[steph72276]

Date: 7/27/2009 8:23:42 AM
Author: Pandora II
Sorry I probably didn't make the highlighted section clear - I'm talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.


What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

Yes, I would still continue with the pregnancy. I have a friend going through this very thing at the moment. Her baby wasn't given much of a chance to live past a few days/weeks. She has now had numerous surgeries and is 6 months old and while she still has complications, she is a happy, loving baby doing all of the things a baby does (smiling, rolling over, clapping, laughing, etc). Doctors are not Gods and can't predict exactly how a baby will do after delivery 100% of the time. Some babies overcome huge challenges to go on to live happy lives.

I do think it takes a special kind of person to bring a special needs child into the world. I was halfway through getting my Master's in Special Education and have worked in school with special needs children, so perhaps that skews my views on the subject. But I also think your view on abortion also skews your feelings on the subject. You ask if I would terminate if I feel like they are going to suffer outside the womb, and my answer is no because I feel like terminating the pregnancy would also cause the baby to suffer as they have a heartbeat, brainwaves, etc. so it is not a choice I am willing to make.

 

[waxing lyrical]

Date: 7/27/2009 8:23:42 AM
Author: Pandora II
Sorry I probably didn''t make the highlighted section clear - I''m talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.


What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

What''s your idea of suffering? I see this argument a lot and many times I think it''s used to justify terminating. Does terminating or being terminated mean there''s less suffering involved? How does one determine what''s suffering. What if it was excruciatingly painful, yet not terminal? What if it were terminal but not excruciatingly painful? Does the situation make a difference?

A baby born at 24 weeks would suffer in many ways. The survival rate isn''t stellar and many micro preemies experience a lot of severe complications. Some born at later gestations don''t make it. Babies born with other abnormalities suffer through several surgeries and complications. I know there are parents that don''t wish to see their baby suffer and choose to let them go, especially when they''ve been through a lot. Babies with fatal conditions may live for 2 hours, 2 days, 2 weeks or longer. The parents I know that chose to continue on with the pregnancy opted for palliative care after the baby was born. A friend of mine recently lost her daughter to T18. She lived for two weeks. Two weeks she won''t ever take back or regret. She did experience some internal struggles as far as how long they should try to keep her alive and whether or not to have surgeries performed. Losing her daughter was devastating, but she''ll forever treasure those two weeks. I wish I had moments with my son when he was alive.

"Suffering" is interpreted differently by many. Some might think what difference does it make since the baby will die either way. Is dieing one way less traumatizing than the other? Is one more "humane" than the other? What''s compassionate or the right choice is a personal matter that is shaped by so many factors.

I would no doubt carry to term should we be faced with an adverse dx/outcome again.

 

[janinegirly]

Date: 7/24/2009 4:02:07 PM
Author: Kay
I got pregnant at 35 and had both anNT scan and amnio. Had the amnio results shown a severe genetic defect, we would have terminated. I imagine it would be a heart-wrenching thing to go through, but we agreed we did not want to bring a child into the world to suffer. After we good back the good results, I realized I had been holding my breath for 4 months and trying not to get too attached just in case. The second half of my pregnancy was much better once we knew everything was okay.

same as Kay here (had the baby at 36, preg at 35). I did not get the amnio though, just all bloodwork for genetic testing which came back around 1/10000 so I passed on additional testing.

this is a very difficult topic and I am kind of surprised that your co-worker is seemingly flippant about it. I hardly told a soul I was pregnant until after 20wks (and there was no turning back no matter what), so I certainly wouldn't discuss amnios and what I'd do with anyone other than the closest of close family.

the 2nd time around I would get an amnio 100%, b/c the risks are more increased as you get closer to 40 (I think around 35, it's still borderline, and more of a precaution). It's right that it's never required, but I think highly recommended once you're around 40. I think I would terminate if there was severe disorder, but I hope to never have to reach that point. Now that I have a baby, I understand how draining it is with one normal child, but on the other hand I also have a better understanding of the value of each little life. I think I would need to be faced with the decision before I'd know exactly how I'd handle it. At the very least I would need probably a good chunk of time alone to think about it.

 

[anchor31]

For us, termination is out of the question no matter what since we believe that life begins at conception, so we chose to not have the first trimester screening done. My 20-weeks ultrasound is next week, so hopefully everything will be well.

The whole disabled child debate is hard for me because it''s very personal. My sister and I were born at 30 weeks. I had brain hemorrage and had to go into emergency surgery at 3 months old. The doctors said I wouldn''t be able to walk and would possibly have developmental and learning disorders. I have CP and I did have a very tough childhood. I''ve had multiple surgeries and all sorts or rehabilitations and I did go through a lot of pain. I can''t imagine how difficult it must have been for my parents. But I walk (I can do pretty much anything, actually), I have a university degree, I''m very happily married and expecting my first child. If my parents had listened to the doctors and given up on me... well, I can''t even think about it. You never know what''s going to happen, or how your child will turn out. And miracles do happen.

Genetic abnormalities aren''t the only way a child can be disabled. So I wonder... Those who said they would terminate, what would you do if you had a disabled child because of something that happened after the birth? Would you still say that you want to spare them the pain and refuse the surgery or treatment that might save their life?

I''m not saying this out of anger or spite. I''m genuinely curious. And I wanted to put it out there... a little food for thought.

 

[anchor31]

Date: 7/27/2009 10:51:15 AM
Author: waxing lyrical

Date: 7/27/2009 8:23:42 AM
Author: Pandora II
Sorry I probably didn''t make the highlighted section clear - I''m talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.


What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

What''s your idea of suffering? I see this argument a lot and many times I think it''s used to justify terminating. Does terminating or being terminated mean there''s less suffering involved? How does one determine what''s suffering. What if it was excruciatingly painful, yet not terminal? What if it were terminal but not excruciatingly painful? Does the situation make a difference?

A baby born at 24 weeks would suffer in many ways. The survival rate isn''t stellar and many micro preemies experience a lot of severe complications. Some born at later gestations don''t make it. Babies born with other abnormalities suffer through several surgeries and complications. I know there are parents that don''t wish to see their baby suffer and choose to let them go, especially when they''ve been through a lot. Babies with fatal conditions may live for 2 hours, 2 days, 2 weeks or longer. The parents I know that chose to continue on with the pregnancy opted for palliative care after the baby was born. A friend of mine recently lost her daughter to T18. She lived for two weeks. Two weeks she won''t ever take back or regret. She did experience some internal struggles as far as how long they should try to keep her alive and whether or not to have surgeries performed. Losing her daughter was devastating, but she''ll forever treasure those two weeks. I wish I had moments with my son when he was alive.

''Suffering'' is interpreted differently by many. Some might think what difference does it make since the baby will die either way. Is dieing one way less traumatizing than the other? Is one more ''humane'' than the other? What''s compassionate or the right choice is a personal matter that is shaped by so many factors.

I would no doubt carry to term should we be faced with an adverse dx/outcome again.

Great post, waxing lyrical.

 

[vespergirl]

I know that this gets into a sticky topic, but some posters mentioned whether the parents should decide which lives are worth living, and which aren''t.

A few years back, I read a heartbreaking article by an adult woman with debilitating spina bifida. In the article, she said that she wished her parents had terminated the pregnancy, and that she had never been born. It was shocking and saddening to read this, especially because the woman was highly accomplished - she had a doctorate and a pretigious career. However, she said that her life was not at all fulfilling, and was frequently excruciating - both physically and emotionally. Besides the obvious physical disabilites, she also lamented the fact that she had never been kissed, and probably never would. She never went to a school dance, never had a boyfriend, would never marry, and would never have a child. She said that all of her degrees and professional accomplishments could never make up for the fact that she never felt like a healthy, vital woman - she felt that her disability defined her to the point that it robbed her of a happy life and that she felt it was more humane to terminate a pregnancy that would result in her type of hanicapped and depressed life.

After reading that, it made me wonder if sometimes when parents choose to continue those pregnancies that will result in severe handicaps, if they''re doing it more for themselves, because of an idea of what their religion expects them to do, rather then what''s actually the most humane choice for the child. Even though the parents will certainly have a lifetime of hardship caring for a severely disabled child, that it no way matches the agony of being the severely handicapped child - also, in the case that the child were to outlive the parents, they would most likely have to spend the rest of their lives at the mercy of strangers in an institution, who may not be as caring and compassionate as the parents were.

I''m just throwing this out there to pose the perspective of the disabled woman who wrote the article - it seemed to me that her unique perspective should be voiced in this type of discussion - that of the severely disabled child, and whether the child would choose that handicapped quality of life for themselves, if given the choice.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

Date: 7/27/2009 8:36:09 AM
Author: steph72276

Date: 7/27/2009 8:23:42 AM
Author: Pandora II
Sorry I probably didn''t make the highlighted section clear - I''m talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.


What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

Yes, I would still continue with the pregnancy. I have a friend going through this very thing at the moment. Her baby wasn''t given much of a chance to live past a few days/weeks. She has now had numerous surgeries and is 6 months old and while she still has complications, she is a happy, loving baby doing all of the things a baby does (smiling, rolling over, clapping, laughing, etc). Doctors are not Gods and can''t predict exactly how a baby will do after delivery 100% of the time. Some babies overcome huge challenges to go on to live happy lives.

I do think it takes a special kind of person to bring a special needs child into the world. I was halfway through getting my Master''s in Special Education and have worked in school with special needs children, so perhaps that skews my views on the subject. But I also think your view on abortion also skews your feelings on the subject. You ask if I would terminate if I feel like they are going to suffer outside the womb, and my answer is no because I feel like terminating the pregnancy would also cause the baby to suffer as they have a heartbeat, brainwaves, etc. so it is not a choice I am willing to make.

I will piggy back Steph on this. We''re very much on the same train of thought here, as we seem to value life to the same degree.

As a parent, I see my job as being one that is first and foremost to love my child, and in that, I would fight for my child under any circumstance, I would fight for my baby to have a healthy life, to be protected. If my child were to have any medical conditions, any medical condition with whatever "outcome" my Dr. would describe to me, my child would be carried to term and loved with all of my heart and my husband''s heart (and my family''s as well). Would it be easy to see a child "suffering" or in pain or to know that my baby may not live to see the age of maturity, or to be able to drive a car? Of course, because I would want only the best things in this world for my child. However, if my baby was born with horrible conditions which limited their lifespan/quality of life, I would still make every effort in this world to have my child experience life to the fullest, and that would mean receiving good care, unmeasurable love, and as many good times as possible. I don''t think it''s right for anyone to think that a child with a condition (any condition) is not allowed to live, or shouldn''t be brought into this world. Every person has purpose and value. Every person. If I''m given the opportunity at motherhood, no matter which additional challenges may come my way (whether through physical conditions, intellectual conditions, mental health issues, or simply a super high-spirited and strong-willed natures), I will gladly and lovingly guide my child through what this world has for him/her. I cannot wait to have this opportunity, and while I will be very sad (for a time) if my child has any issue, however, I will not stop caring for my child, fighting for my child, or learning more to make my child as comfortable and as loved as is possible for the entire time I am blessed to have that child on this earth with me.

To me, that is what being a mother is. I realize some see it other ways, and while I wish it weren''t so, I realize I can''t sway anyone''s decisions/choices, but abortions can bring "excruciating" pain in themselves to the child, we as parents simply don''t have to witness it first hand, which to me would be a parent choosing to NOT make a "difficult decision," because it''s so much easier to simply kill (which is what "termination" is, and such a weak adjective for the extreme measures of pulling apart of body parts and sucking of brain tissue that is what an abortion really consists of) your child rather than endure the struggles of being a parent to that child with special needs. To me, that''s absolutely about the parent and not the child.

So to the highlighted portion above, I absolutely would brith my child if they were determined by others to be "incompatible" with life. Because life is life and my baby will have a mother''s arms wrapped around him/her to bring whatever comfort this mother could provide. Extreme suffering is experienced in whichever of the options is chosen, because abortion is also an extreme force of pain to the child which we don''t have to see (which is why I think so many people to react so flippantly to it, as if it''s simply gutting out some tissue and cells, when in fact by the time this testing/screening can be done, there are brainwaves, heartbeats, legs, arms, a face, AKA: a baby there). So what I think you''re asking is if we *knew* our child would only live a number of hours after birth, would we? I would absolutely--- given the opportunity to comfort my child through the pain of death or to simply allow his/her brains to be plunged out of her/his skull so *I* wouldn''t have to suffer, I would choose to be there for my child through any and all struggles in this life. Without a doubt.

I think the statements that it takes a special person to be a special needs parent are true, but I also think that we''re not given more than we can handle and that we are more equipped to handle things than we realize. Think of any time you were handed a difficult situation; you muddled through and likely came out stronger for it. I think just being a parent provides for us to learn and to be better people, more patient and caring people and I think that faced with a certain position, anyone can rise up and come through a struggle, and be glad for the experience. If I had a special needs baby, I would absolutely be a proud parent to that child. Regardless of what changes that child''s life made in my own. That''s what a parent does. You don''t get a guarentee as to what kind of person your child will be... a baby could be born fine with no issues and suffer a terrible fall as an infant and your life as a parent, as a family, is never the same. Things happen that aren''t always "fair," and while we''d all like the benefit of having healthy children, it sadly doesn''t always work out that way. So you take what you''ve been given, you grow, and you go forward, finding joy in this life, because it''s the only life we get.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/27/2009 11:40:56 AM
Author: anchor31
For us, termination is out of the question no matter what since we believe that life begins at conception, so we chose to not have the first trimester screening done. My 20-weeks ultrasound is next week, so hopefully everything will be well.

The whole disabled child debate is hard for me because it''s very personal. My sister and I were born at 30 weeks. I had brain hemorrage and had to go into emergency surgery at 3 months old. The doctors said I wouldn''t be able to walk and would possibly have developmental and learning disorders. I have CP and I did have a very tough childhood. I''ve had multiple surgeries and all sorts or rehabilitations and I did go through a lot of pain. I can''t imagine how difficult it must have been for my parents. But I walk (I can do pretty much anything, actually), I have a university degree, I''m very happily married and expecting my first child. If my parents had listened to the doctors and given up on me... well, I can''t even think about it. You never know what''s going to happen, or how your child will turn out. And miracles do happen.

Genetic abnormalities aren''t the only way a child can be disabled. So I wonder... Those who said they would terminate, what would you do if you had a disabled child because of something that happened after the birth? Would you still say that you want to spare them the pain and refuse the surgery or treatment that might save their life?

I''m not saying this out of anger or spite. I''m genuinely curious. And I wanted to put it out there... a little food for thought.

Anchor I don''t think this is comparing apples to oranges. How you feel about your baby pre-birth and after you meet the tot are two different things. That affects any and all decisions.

And these days, I am not sure how much parents can refuse life saving treatment (like that kid that was recently in the press.)

That is very interesting about you! I am glad to hear how much you have overcome. How does your CP affect you these days? I am trying to learn more about it and am curious.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/27/2009 11:46:28 AM
Author: fisherofmengirly

Date: 7/27/2009 8:36:09 AM
Author: steph72276

Date: 7/27/2009 8:23:42 AM
Author: Pandora II
Sorry I probably didn''t make the highlighted section clear - I''m talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.


What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

Yes, I would still continue with the pregnancy. I have a friend going through this very thing at the moment. Her baby wasn''t given much of a chance to live past a few days/weeks. She has now had numerous surgeries and is 6 months old and while she still has complications, she is a happy, loving baby doing all of the things a baby does (smiling, rolling over, clapping, laughing, etc). Doctors are not Gods and can''t predict exactly how a baby will do after delivery 100% of the time. Some babies overcome huge challenges to go on to live happy lives.

I do think it takes a special kind of person to bring a special needs child into the world. I was halfway through getting my Master''s in Special Education and have worked in school with special needs children, so perhaps that skews my views on the subject. But I also think your view on abortion also skews your feelings on the subject. You ask if I would terminate if I feel like they are going to suffer outside the womb, and my answer is no because I feel like terminating the pregnancy would also cause the baby to suffer as they have a heartbeat, brainwaves, etc. so it is not a choice I am willing to make.

I will piggy back Steph on this. We''re very much on the same train of thought here, as we seem to value life to the same degree.

As a parent, I see my job as being one that is first and foremost to love my child, and in that, I would fight for my child under any circumstance, I would fight for my baby to have a healthy life, to be protected. If my child were to have any medical conditions, any medical condition with whatever ''outcome'' my Dr. would describe to me, my child would be carried to term and loved with all of my heart and my husband''s heart (and my family''s as well). Would it be easy to see a child ''suffering'' or in pain or to know that my baby may not live to see the age of maturity, or to be able to drive a car? Of course, because I would want only the best things in this world for my child. However, if my baby was born with horrible conditions which limited their lifespan/quality of life, I would still make every effort in this world to have my child experience life to the fullest, and that would mean receiving good care, unmeasurable love, and as many good times as possible. I don''t think it''s right for anyone to think that a child with a condition (any condition) is not allowed to live, or shouldn''t be brought into this world. Every person has purpose and value. Every person. If I''m given the opportunity at motherhood, no matter which additional challenges may come my way (whether through physical conditions, intellectual conditions, mental health issues, or simply a super high-spirited and strong-willed natures), I will gladly and lovingly guide my child through what this world has for him/her. I cannot wait to have this opportunity, and while I will be very sad (for a time) if my child has any issue, however, I will not stop caring for my child, fighting for my child, or learning more to make my child as comfortable and as loved as is possible for the entire time I am blessed to have that child on this earth with me.

To me, that is what being a mother is. I realize some see it other ways, and while I wish it weren''t so, I realize I can''t sway anyone''s decisions/choices, but abortions can bring ''excruciating'' pain in themselves to the child, we as parents simply don''t have to witness it first hand, which to me would be a parent choosing to NOT make a ''difficult decision,'' because it''s so much easier to simply kill (which is what ''termination'' is, and such a weak adjective for the extreme measures of pulling apart of body parts and sucking of brain tissue that is what an abortion really consists of) your child rather than endure the struggles of being a parent to that child with special needs. To me, that''s absolutely about the parent and not the child.

So to the highlighted portion above, I absolutely would brith my child if they were determined by others to be ''incompatible'' with life. Because life is life and my baby will have a mother''s arms wrapped around him/her to bring whatever comfort this mother could provide. Extreme suffering is experienced in whichever of the options is chosen, because abortion is also an extreme force of pain to the child which we don''t have to see (which is why I think so many people to react so flippantly to it, as if it''s simply gutting out some tissue and cells, when in fact by the time this testing/screening can be done, there are brainwaves, heartbeats, legs, arms, a face, AKA: a baby there). So what I think you''re asking is if we *knew* our child would only live a number of hours after birth, would we? I would absolutely--- given the opportunity to comfort my child through the pain of death or to simply allow his/her brains to be plunged out of her/his skull so *I* wouldn''t have to suffer, I would choose to be there for my child through any and all struggles in this life. Without a doubt.

I think the statements that it takes a special person to be a special needs parent are true, but I also think that we''re not given more than we can handle and that we are more equipped to handle things than we realize. Think of any time you were handed a difficult situation; you muddled through and likely came out stronger for it. I think just being a parent provides for us to learn and to be better people, more patient and caring people and I think that faced with a certain position, anyone can rise up and come through a struggle, and be glad for the experience. If I had a special needs baby, I would absolutely be a proud parent to that child. Regardless of what changes that child''s life made in my own. That''s what a parent does. You don''t get a guarentee as to what kind of person your child will be... a baby could be born fine with no issues and suffer a terrible fall as an infant and your life as a parent, as a family, is never the same. Things happen that aren''t always ''fair,'' and while we''d all like the benefit of having healthy children, it sadly doesn''t always work out that way. So you take what you''ve been given, you grow, and you go forward, finding joy in this life, because it''s the only life we get.

Fisher, while I understand where you are coming from, there is lot of *I* in your post here.

"*I* would be a proud parent." "*I* would be glad for the experience." "*I* would choose to be there for my child through any and all strugges in this life."

However, the biggest issue I see with that is that for all your love for your child, it is HIS (or her) struggle and pain.

The story that vespergirl posted is the reason why I would consider termination under some circumstances.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

Date: 7/27/2009 11:45:34 AM
Author: vespergirl
I know that this gets into a sticky topic, but some posters mentioned whether the parents should decide which lives are worth living, and which aren''t.

A few years back, I read a heartbreaking article by an adult woman with debilitating spina bifida. In the article, she said that she wished her parents had terminated the pregnancy, and that she had never been born. It was shocking and saddening to read this, especially because the woman was highly accomplished - she had a doctorate and a pretigious career. However, she said that her life was not at all fulfilling, and was frequently excruciating - both physically and emotionally. Besides the obvious physical disabilites, she also lamented the fact that she had never been kissed, and probably never would. She never went to a school dance, never had a boyfriend, would never marry, and would never have a child. She said that all of her degrees and professional accomplishments could never make up for the fact that she never felt like a healthy, vital woman - she felt that her disability defined her to the point that it robbed her of a happy life and that she felt it was more humane to terminate a pregnancy that would result in her type of hanicapped and depressed life.

After reading that, it made me wonder if sometimes when parents choose to continue those pregnancies that will result in severe handicaps, if they''re doing it more for themselves, because of an idea of what their religion expects them to do, rather then what''s actually the most humane choice for the child. Even though the parents will certainly have a lifetime of hardship caring for a severely disabled child, that it no way matches the agony of being the severely handicapped child - also, in the case that the child were to outlive the parents, they would most likely have to spend the rest of their lives at the mercy of strangers in an institution, who may not be as caring and compassionate as the parents were.

I''m just throwing this out there to pose the perspective of the disabled woman who wrote the article - it seemed to me that her unique perspective should be voiced in this type of discussion - that of the severely disabled child, and whether the child would choose that handicapped quality of life for themselves, if given the choice.

Interesting article, Vesper. I would be so heartbroken if my child regretted me birthing her. I would hope that my child would learn the value of life and that joy is where you find it, however. There are always going to be situations in this life that we would have wished had panned out differently (I mean, don''t we all have regrets in this life?), but life is about doing what you can with what you have. I mean, this person in the article you speak of has accomplished many things, and I would imagine those accomplishments have made an impact on others than simply herself. It''s just odd to me that a person would say, "I wish I''d never been born," and harbor anger toward their parents for it.

Do you have access to this article for us to review it? You mention "life in an institution" and things like that... did this person live in an institution? Did her parents give birth to her and then write her off, never visiting or showing any love or compassion to her? Actions of that sort would absolutely make a person wonder why they were even born, etc.

I suppose if my child were born with "abnormalities" and they resented me for being born, that would be something I''d just live through, because my baby has worth and meaning and value, even if he/she can''t see it at any one particular moment in time. I would pray that he/she would find her/his worth in this world, though, as it would shown to them daily through the love and support of his/her parents.

A lot is to be said for the way a child (special needs/medical conditions or not) is raised and the outlook they have on life, I believe.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

Date: 7/27/2009 11:56:15 AM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/27/2009 11:46:28 AM
Author: fisherofmengirly

Date: 7/27/2009 8:36:09 AM
Author: steph72276

Date: 7/27/2009 8:23:42 AM
Author: Pandora II
Sorry I probably didn't make the highlighted section clear - I'm talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.


What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

Yes, I would still continue with the pregnancy. I have a friend going through this very thing at the moment. Her baby wasn't given much of a chance to live past a few days/weeks. She has now had numerous surgeries and is 6 months old and while she still has complications, she is a happy, loving baby doing all of the things a baby does (smiling, rolling over, clapping, laughing, etc). Doctors are not Gods and can't predict exactly how a baby will do after delivery 100% of the time. Some babies overcome huge challenges to go on to live happy lives.

I do think it takes a special kind of person to bring a special needs child into the world. I was halfway through getting my Master's in Special Education and have worked in school with special needs children, so perhaps that skews my views on the subject. But I also think your view on abortion also skews your feelings on the subject. You ask if I would terminate if I feel like they are going to suffer outside the womb, and my answer is no because I feel like terminating the pregnancy would also cause the baby to suffer as they have a heartbeat, brainwaves, etc. so it is not a choice I am willing to make.

I will piggy back Steph on this. We're very much on the same train of thought here, as we seem to value life to the same degree.

As a parent, I see my job as being one that is first and foremost to love my child, and in that, I would fight for my child under any circumstance, I would fight for my baby to have a healthy life, to be protected. If my child were to have any medical conditions, any medical condition with whatever 'outcome' my Dr. would describe to me, my child would be carried to term and loved with all of my heart and my husband's heart (and my family's as well). Would it be easy to see a child 'suffering' or in pain or to know that my baby may not live to see the age of maturity, or to be able to drive a car? Of course, because I would want only the best things in this world for my child. However, if my baby was born with horrible conditions which limited their lifespan/quality of life, I would still make every effort in this world to have my child experience life to the fullest, and that would mean receiving good care, unmeasurable love, and as many good times as possible. I don't think it's right for anyone to think that a child with a condition (any condition) is not allowed to live, or shouldn't be brought into this world. Every person has purpose and value. Every person. If I'm given the opportunity at motherhood, no matter which additional challenges may come my way (whether through physical conditions, intellectual conditions, mental health issues, or simply a super high-spirited and strong-willed natures), I will gladly and lovingly guide my child through what this world has for him/her. I cannot wait to have this opportunity, and while I will be very sad (for a time) if my child has any issue, however, I will not stop caring for my child, fighting for my child, or learning more to make my child as comfortable and as loved as is possible for the entire time I am blessed to have that child on this earth with me.

To me, that is what being a mother is. I realize some see it other ways, and while I wish it weren't so, I realize I can't sway anyone's decisions/choices, but abortions can bring 'excruciating' pain in themselves to the child, we as parents simply don't have to witness it first hand, which to me would be a parent choosing to NOT make a 'difficult decision,' because it's so much easier to simply kill (which is what 'termination' is, and such a weak adjective for the extreme measures of pulling apart of body parts and sucking of brain tissue that is what an abortion really consists of) your child rather than endure the struggles of being a parent to that child with special needs. To me, that's absolutely about the parent and not the child.

So to the highlighted portion above, I absolutely would brith my child if they were determined by others to be 'incompatible' with life. Because life is life and my baby will have a mother's arms wrapped around him/her to bring whatever comfort this mother could provide. Extreme suffering is experienced in whichever of the options is chosen, because abortion is also an extreme force of pain to the child which we don't have to see (which is why I think so many people to react so flippantly to it, as if it's simply gutting out some tissue and cells, when in fact by the time this testing/screening can be done, there are brainwaves, heartbeats, legs, arms, a face, AKA: a baby there). So what I think you're asking is if we *knew* our child would only live a number of hours after birth, would we? I would absolutely--- given the opportunity to comfort my child through the pain of death or to simply allow his/her brains to be plunged out of her/his skull so *I* wouldn't have to suffer, I would choose to be there for my child through any and all struggles in this life. Without a doubt.

I think the statements that it takes a special person to be a special needs parent are true, but I also think that we're not given more than we can handle and that we are more equipped to handle things than we realize. Think of any time you were handed a difficult situation; you muddled through and likely came out stronger for it. I think just being a parent provides for us to learn and to be better people, more patient and caring people and I think that faced with a certain position, anyone can rise up and come through a struggle, and be glad for the experience. If I had a special needs baby, I would absolutely be a proud parent to that child. Regardless of what changes that child's life made in my own. That's what a parent does. You don't get a guarentee as to what kind of person your child will be... a baby could be born fine with no issues and suffer a terrible fall as an infant and your life as a parent, as a family, is never the same. Things happen that aren't always 'fair,' and while we'd all like the benefit of having healthy children, it sadly doesn't always work out that way. So you take what you've been given, you grow, and you go forward, finding joy in this life, because it's the only life we get.

Fisher, while I understand where you are coming from, there is lot of *I* in your post here.

'*I* would be a proud parent.' '*I* would be glad for the experience.' '*I* would choose to be there for my child through any and all strugges in this life.'

However, the biggest issue I see with that is that for all your love for your child, it is HIS (or her) struggle and pain.

The story that vespergirl posted is the reason why I would consider termination under some circumstances.

Of course there is a lot of *I,* Tgal. My child wouldn't be able to speak for him/herself yet. My job is to bring that child into the world so he/she can speak their mind! And that will absolutely happen! A parent's job is to do the best they can for their child... before your baby could speak to you (and even though she can now), you did and do for her, and you make the best decisions for her safety and health and protection. That is the goal of a mother. And one I really do take seriously.

If you know of a way for an unborn child to express their thoughts on whether or not they feel they're worth being born, let me know. Because until then, I'll err on the side of caution and let my child experience life for him/herself.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:00:43 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly

Of course there is a lot of *I,* Tgal. My child wouldn't be able to speak for him/herself yet. My job is to bring that child into the world so he/she can speak their mind! And that will absolutely happen! A parent's job is to do the best they can for their child... before your baby could speak to you (and even though she can now), you did and do for her, and you make the best decisions for her safety and health and protection. That is the goal of a mother. And one I really do take seriously.

If you know of a way for an unborn child to express their thoughts on whether or not they feel they're worth being born, let me know. Because until then, I'll err on the side of caution and let my child experience life for him/herself.

As do people who would consider termination Fisher.

I have no issue with people who would bring a child into this world who would suffer tremendously. Different people make different decisions and it's hard to say what's right and wrong. But I wonder...when that child can speak and seriously told you, "I wish you never brought me into this world", would that make you feel any sort of regret? Or at that point would your personal convinctions still outweigh the fact that your child hates life and is suffering?

As a parent, it is just a valid and loving to choose to terminate based on quality of life that child would have. No, nothing in life is a sure thing, like anchor said. But parents - ALL parents regardless of how they feel about this issue) are doing the best they can.

ETA, I see you answered the question to some degree in the your post above this one.

 

[steph72276]

Fisher, I agree with everything you said. The people that state that they would terminate so that the baby wouldn''t have to suffer are either in denial or uneducated about the abortion process and how it works. The only thing ending a life inside the womb protects is the mother from having to witness and see with her own eyes her child''s death and I guess that makes it easier on some people. I would at least like to be able to hold and comfort my child if they are going to die instead of the way it would be "taken care of" inside the womb.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 7/27/2009 11:57:21 AM
Author: fisherofmengirly

Date: 7/27/2009 11:45:34 AM
Author: vespergirl
I know that this gets into a sticky topic, but some posters mentioned whether the parents should decide which lives are worth living, and which aren''t.

A few years back, I read a heartbreaking article by an adult woman with debilitating spina bifida. In the article, she said that she wished her parents had terminated the pregnancy, and that she had never been born. It was shocking and saddening to read this, especially because the woman was highly accomplished - she had a doctorate and a pretigious career. However, she said that her life was not at all fulfilling, and was frequently excruciating - both physically and emotionally. Besides the obvious physical disabilites, she also lamented the fact that she had never been kissed, and probably never would. She never went to a school dance, never had a boyfriend, would never marry, and would never have a child. She said that all of her degrees and professional accomplishments could never make up for the fact that she never felt like a healthy, vital woman - she felt that her disability defined her to the point that it robbed her of a happy life and that she felt it was more humane to terminate a pregnancy that would result in her type of hanicapped and depressed life.

After reading that, it made me wonder if sometimes when parents choose to continue those pregnancies that will result in severe handicaps, if they''re doing it more for themselves, because of an idea of what their religion expects them to do, rather then what''s actually the most humane choice for the child. Even though the parents will certainly have a lifetime of hardship caring for a severely disabled child, that it no way matches the agony of being the severely handicapped child - also, in the case that the child were to outlive the parents, they would most likely have to spend the rest of their lives at the mercy of strangers in an institution, who may not be as caring and compassionate as the parents were.

I''m just throwing this out there to pose the perspective of the disabled woman who wrote the article - it seemed to me that her unique perspective should be voiced in this type of discussion - that of the severely disabled child, and whether the child would choose that handicapped quality of life for themselves, if given the choice.

Interesting article, Vesper. I would be so heartbroken if my child regretted me birthing her. I would hope that my child would learn the value of life and that joy is where you find it, however. There are always going to be situations in this life that we would have wished had panned out differently (I mean, don''t we all have regrets in this life?), but life is about doing what you can with what you have. I mean, this person in the article you speak of has accomplished many things, and I would imagine those accomplishments have made an impact on others than simply herself. It''s just odd to me that a person would say, ''I wish I''d never been born,'' and harbor anger toward their parents for it.

Do you have access to this article for us to review it? You mention ''life in an institution'' and things like that... did this person live in an institution? Did her parents give birth to her and then write her off, never visiting or showing any love or compassion to her? Actions of that sort would absolutely make a person wonder why they were even born, etc.

I suppose if my child were born with ''abnormalities'' and they resented me for being born, that would be something I''d just live through, because my baby has worth and meaning and value, even if he/she can''t see it at any one particular moment in time. I would pray that he/she would find her/his worth in this world, though, as it would shown to them daily through the love and support of his/her parents.

A lot is to be said for the way a child (special needs/medical conditions or not) is raised and the outlook they have on life, I believe.

I don''t have a link to the article - it''s one that I remember reading in a magazine probably 10 years ago. The author was writing as an advocate of the "right to die" movement. If you google "right to die", several of the movements advocates are disabled adults who suffered so greatly from their disabilities that they wish they had never been born. There are many lawsuits pending right now related to this movement.

In the case of the woman who wrote the article, I honestly don''t remember any specifics about whether she lived in an instution, but she did mention that her parents and always been loving and supportive, and encouraged her to do the things that she was able to do, which she obviously did since she had degrees and an accomplished career. Her whole point, however, was that when people wanted her to focus on what she could do, she couldn''t help but regret all of the things that she wasn''t able to do, the traditionally feminine world of marriage and babies that she felt shut out of.

After reading that article, I remember the message that she wanted to send, that even though her family and colleagues always loved and encouraged her for being "special," she always just felt the physical and emotional pain of being severely handicapped. She said that the agony of being disabled far outweiged her other accomplishments and the love of her family, and that even with her "extraordinary" disabled life full of accomplishments, she still wished that she had never been born.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:11:22 PM
Author: steph72276
Fisher, I agree with everything you said. The people that state that they would terminate so that the baby wouldn''t have to suffer are either in denial or uneducated about the abortion process and how it works. The only thing ending a life inside the womb protects is the mother from having to witness and see with her own eyes her child''s death and I guess that makes it easier on some people. I would at least like to be able to hold and comfort my child if they are going to die instead of the way it would be ''taken care of'' inside the womb.

Steph, it''s comments like this that just fuel the fire.

There could be all sorts of comments given in reverse about religious ignorance, but I see people are refraining.

For the record, I am religious. However I am pro choice because I don''t believe in forcing my views upon anyone else, just as I enjoy the freedom to choose what I believe. For me personally, I''m generally pro life, but I do believe in extenuating circumstances - which again, probably leads me to being pro choice.

I do hate the thought of abortion. My friend currently is pregnant with triplets so I was reading up on selective abortion. They inject a chemical "which causes the heart to stop beating." I don''t know...that line just really made me sad.

But as babies develop, their senses develop. An embryo is NOT the same thing as a full term fetus. If this were so, it would be able to survive outside the womb, wouldn''t it? Thus, I have to believe that the pain they feel must be different and it''s a choice of what would be the least painful way to die.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:00:43 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly

Date: 7/27/2009 11:56:15 AM
Author: TravelingGal


Fisher, while I understand where you are coming from, there is lot of *I* in your post here.

''*I* would be a proud parent.'' ''*I* would be glad for the experience.'' ''*I* would choose to be there for my child through any and all strugges in this life.''

However, the biggest issue I see with that is that for all your love for your child, it is HIS (or her) struggle and pain.

The story that vespergirl posted is the reason why I would consider termination under some circumstances.

Of course there is a lot of *I,* Tgal. My child wouldn''t be able to speak for him/herself yet. My job is to bring that child into the world so he/she can speak their mind! And that will absolutely happen! A parent''s job is to do the best they can for their child... before your baby could speak to you (and even though she can now), you did and do for her, and you make the best decisions for her safety and health and protection. That is the goal of a mother. And one I really do take seriously.

If you know of a way for an unborn child to express their thoughts on whether or not they feel they''re worth being born, let me know. Because until then, I''ll err on the side of caution and let my child experience life for him/herself.

I just wanted to mention that there is no guarantee at all that a severely disabled child would ever be able to speak at all, never mind form a coherent sentence to "speak their mind." Many children who are severely handicapped are never able to learn to speak or clearly communicate, so there''s to way to know if they are happy, or whether they spend every day in misery.

 

[steph72276]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:18:53 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/27/2009 12:11:22 PM

Author: steph72276

Fisher, I agree with everything you said. The people that state that they would terminate so that the baby wouldn''t have to suffer are either in denial or uneducated about the abortion process and how it works. The only thing ending a life inside the womb protects is the mother from having to witness and see with her own eyes her child''s death and I guess that makes it easier on some people. I would at least like to be able to hold and comfort my child if they are going to die instead of the way it would be ''taken care of'' inside the womb.

Steph, it''s comments like this that just fuel the fire.


There could be all sorts of comments given in reverse about religious ignorance, but I see people are refraining.


For the record, I am religious. However I am pro choice because I don''t believe in forcing my views upon anyone else, just as I enjoy the freedom to choose what I believe. For me personally, I''m generally pro life, but I do believe in extenuating circumstances - which again, probably leads me to being pro choice.


I do hate the thought of abortion. My friend currently is pregnant with triplets so I was reading up on selective abortion. They inject a chemical ''which causes the heart to stop beating.'' I don''t know...that line just really made me sad.


But as babies develop, their senses develop. An embryo is NOT the same thing as a full term fetus. If this were so, it would be able to survive outside the womb, wouldn''t it? Thus, I have to believe that the pain they feel must be different and it''s a choice of what would be the least painful way to die.

Well, I was specifically referring to the person that said that aborting the baby would spare it from suffering when talking about a child that might live for hours/days. I was saying that the child would suffer in either instance and if they thought otherwise, they are mistaken. Just like the person that said aborting a baby is just like putting a dog to sleep....um, no the baby is not put to sleep, it is much more horrific than that.

 

[waxing lyrical]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:11:22 PM
Author: steph72276
Fisher, I agree with everything you said. The people that state that they would terminate so that the baby wouldn''t have to suffer are either in denial or uneducated about the abortion process and how it works. The only thing ending a life inside the womb protects is the mother from having to witness and see with her own eyes her child''s death and I guess that makes it easier on some people. I would at least like to be able to hold and comfort my child if they are going to die instead of the way it would be ''taken care of'' inside the womb.

To the bold, most definitely. There''s something I want to add. There are some that opt for induction termination. Some opt for the D&E or IDX, which is unfathomable to me and absolutely horrific. While I''m pro-choice, the standard abortion procedure makes me shudder. Some view induction termination as more "humane." It''s often the first option/route mentioned to the mother if she''s in her second trimester.

Sometimes I wonder if it''s a fatal condition not associated with the trisomies or NTDs and the condition wasn''t caught until later, say, 28 weeks, what would be the course of action? Would it be to interrupt the pregnancy or let it continue on its course? Since we didn''t opt for screenings with DS (or my girls) the severity of his condition was unknown to us. Even if we had the screening or amnio done it still wouldn''t have told us how the condition manifested in him. The ultrasound I had missed every abnormality he presented with. If anything was detected I was already 25 weeks, which is past the point where it''s "acceptable" or the norm to interrupt a pregnancy. It wouldn''t have crossed our mind and while I knew the symptoms I was experiencing were associated with the trisomies, we were unaware how severe his combination of abnormalities were.

I *do* understand that the condition in question plays a role in one''s decision or view on the matter. My husband and I aren''t religious, so we don''t gravitate one way over another due to religious matters. I know his feelings on carrying to term differs depending on the condition. There are some conditions he would be inclined to want to interrupt the pregnancy. I just know he''s not comfortable with the standard abortion procedure. If I ever had to interrupt a pregnancy I would only do so by the induction route. At least then I''d get to see my baby, take pictures and spend time with him/her.

 

[steph72276]

Waxing, just wanted to say how sorry I am for your loss. I can''t even imagine the pain you and your husband suffered with this heartbreaking loss. I hope you are doing well.

 

[steph72276]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:18:53 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/27/2009 12:11:22 PM

Author: steph72276

Fisher, I agree with everything you said. The people that state that they would terminate so that the baby wouldn''t have to suffer are either in denial or uneducated about the abortion process and how it works. The only thing ending a life inside the womb protects is the mother from having to witness and see with her own eyes her child''s death and I guess that makes it easier on some people. I would at least like to be able to hold and comfort my child if they are going to die instead of the way it would be ''taken care of'' inside the womb.

Steph, it''s comments like this that just fuel the fire.


There could be all sorts of comments given in reverse about religious ignorance, but I see people are refraining.


For the record, I am religious. However I am pro choice because I don''t believe in forcing my views upon anyone else, just as I enjoy the freedom to choose what I believe. For me personally, I''m generally pro life, but I do believe in extenuating circumstances - which again, probably leads me to being pro choice.


I do hate the thought of abortion. My friend currently is pregnant with triplets so I was reading up on selective abortion. They inject a chemical ''which causes the heart to stop beating.'' I don''t know...that line just really made me sad.


But as babies develop, their senses develop. An embryo is NOT the same thing as a full term fetus. If this were so, it would be able to survive outside the womb, wouldn''t it? Thus, I have to believe that the pain they feel must be different and it''s a choice of what would be the least painful way to die.

I don''t know how to highlight, but in response to your line about an embryo not being the same as a fetus, the screenings are done between week 11-13 and then results come in a few weeks later, so when you find out about the abnormalities, the baby is already a fetus.

 

[kennedy]

Date: 7/27/2009 11:46:28 AM
Author: fisherofmengirly

Date: 7/27/2009 8:36:09 AM

Author: steph72276

Date: 7/27/2009 8:23:42 AM

Author: Pandora II

Sorry I probably didn''t make the highlighted section clear - I''m talking about when the abnormalities will mean the baby will die at or shortly after birth - not conditions like Downs where I understand why people make the choice to continue the pregnancy.



What I ask is: If the child had a condition that was incompatible with life, and you found this out, would you continue the pregnancy in the knowledge that the birth process or whatever number of hours the child could survive after birth could potentially cause extreme suffering to that child?

Yes, I would still continue with the pregnancy. I have a friend going through this very thing at the moment. Her baby wasn''t given much of a chance to live past a few days/weeks. She has now had numerous surgeries and is 6 months old and while she still has complications, she is a happy, loving baby doing all of the things a baby does (smiling, rolling over, clapping, laughing, etc). Doctors are not Gods and can''t predict exactly how a baby will do after delivery 100% of the time. Some babies overcome huge challenges to go on to live happy lives.


I do think it takes a special kind of person to bring a special needs child into the world. I was halfway through getting my Master''s in Special Education and have worked in school with special needs children, so perhaps that skews my views on the subject. But I also think your view on abortion also skews your feelings on the subject. You ask if I would terminate if I feel like they are going to suffer outside the womb, and my answer is no because I feel like terminating the pregnancy would also cause the baby to suffer as they have a heartbeat, brainwaves, etc. so it is not a choice I am willing to make.

I will piggy back Steph on this. We''re very much on the same train of thought here, as we seem to value life to the same degree.


As a parent, I see my job as being one that is first and foremost to love my child, and in that, I would fight for my child under any circumstance, I would fight for my baby to have a healthy life, to be protected. If my child were to have any medical conditions, any medical condition with whatever ''outcome'' my Dr. would describe to me, my child would be carried to term and loved with all of my heart and my husband''s heart (and my family''s as well). Would it be easy to see a child ''suffering'' or in pain or to know that my baby may not live to see the age of maturity, or to be able to drive a car? Of course, because I would want only the best things in this world for my child. However, if my baby was born with horrible conditions which limited their lifespan/quality of life, I would still make every effort in this world to have my child experience life to the fullest, and that would mean receiving good care, unmeasurable love, and as many good times as possible. I don''t think it''s right for anyone to think that a child with a condition (any condition) is not allowed to live, or shouldn''t be brought into this world. Every person has purpose and value. Every person. If I''m given the opportunity at motherhood, no matter which additional challenges may come my way (whether through physical conditions, intellectual conditions, mental health issues, or simply a super high-spirited and strong-willed natures), I will gladly and lovingly guide my child through what this world has for him/her. I cannot wait to have this opportunity, and while I will be very sad (for a time) if my child has any issue, however, I will not stop caring for my child, fighting for my child, or learning more to make my child as comfortable and as loved as is possible for the entire time I am blessed to have that child on this earth with me.


To me, that is what being a mother is. I realize some see it other ways, and while I wish it weren''t so, I realize I can''t sway anyone''s decisions/choices, but abortions can bring ''excruciating'' pain in themselves to the child, we as parents simply don''t have to witness it first hand, which to me would be a parent choosing to NOT make a ''difficult decision,'' because it''s so much easier to simply kill (which is what ''termination'' is, and such a weak adjective for the extreme measures of pulling apart of body parts and sucking of brain tissue that is what an abortion really consists of) your child rather than endure the struggles of being a parent to that child with special needs. To me, that''s absolutely about the parent and not the child.


So to the highlighted portion above, I absolutely would brith my child if they were determined by others to be ''incompatible'' with life. Because life is life and my baby will have a mother''s arms wrapped around him/her to bring whatever comfort this mother could provide. Extreme suffering is experienced in whichever of the options is chosen, because abortion is also an extreme force of pain to the child which we don''t have to see (which is why I think so many people to react so flippantly to it, as if it''s simply gutting out some tissue and cells, when in fact by the time this testing/screening can be done, there are brainwaves, heartbeats, legs, arms, a face, AKA: a baby there). So what I think you''re asking is if we *knew* our child would only live a number of hours after birth, would we? I would absolutely--- given the opportunity to comfort my child through the pain of death or to simply allow his/her brains to be plunged out of her/his skull so *I* wouldn''t have to suffer, I would choose to be there for my child through any and all struggles in this life. Without a doubt.


I think the statements that it takes a special person to be a special needs parent are true, but I also think that we''re not given more than we can handle and that we are more equipped to handle things than we realize. Think of any time you were handed a difficult situation; you muddled through and likely came out stronger for it. I think just being a parent provides for us to learn and to be better people, more patient and caring people and I think that faced with a certain position, anyone can rise up and come through a struggle, and be glad for the experience. If I had a special needs baby, I would absolutely be a proud parent to that child. Regardless of what changes that child''s life made in my own. That''s what a parent does. You don''t get a guarentee as to what kind of person your child will be... a baby could be born fine with no issues and suffer a terrible fall as an infant and your life as a parent, as a family, is never the same. Things happen that aren''t always ''fair,'' and while we''d all like the benefit of having healthy children, it sadly doesn''t always work out that way. So you take what you''ve been given, you grow, and you go forward, finding joy in this life, because it''s the only life we get.

I understand your position and think it''s wonderful you would have the CHOICE to do what you feel so strongly is right for you and your unborn child. That said, shouldn''t other women have the same choice you have to do what they feel is right for them, even if it means terminating the pregnancy? You have every right to feel exactly as you do, but I have to admit that I found the tone of your post somewhat offensive. You seem to imply very strongly that a woman who might choose to terminate her pregnancy in order to spare her child from suffering outside the womb is both selfish and flippant about what can only be seen as a devastating choice. I resent the implication that those who feel differently than you do "value life" to a lesser degree. My heart goes out to any woman who has ever been in the awful position of having to make a choice like this and would never suggest that one decision is easier than another. That, to me, is not valuing the life of the mother.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:25:02 PM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 7/27/2009 12:00:43 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly

Date: 7/27/2009 11:56:15 AM
Author: TravelingGal


Fisher, while I understand where you are coming from, there is lot of *I* in your post here.

''*I* would be a proud parent.'' ''*I* would be glad for the experience.'' ''*I* would choose to be there for my child through any and all strugges in this life.''

However, the biggest issue I see with that is that for all your love for your child, it is HIS (or her) struggle and pain.

The story that vespergirl posted is the reason why I would consider termination under some circumstances.

Of course there is a lot of *I,* Tgal. My child wouldn''t be able to speak for him/herself yet. My job is to bring that child into the world so he/she can speak their mind! And that will absolutely happen! A parent''s job is to do the best they can for their child... before your baby could speak to you (and even though she can now), you did and do for her, and you make the best decisions for her safety and health and protection. That is the goal of a mother. And one I really do take seriously.

If you know of a way for an unborn child to express their thoughts on whether or not they feel they''re worth being born, let me know. Because until then, I''ll err on the side of caution and let my child experience life for him/herself.

I just wanted to mention that there is no guarantee at all that a severely disabled child would ever be able to speak at all, never mind form a coherent sentence to ''speak their mind.'' Many children who are severely handicapped are never able to learn to speak or clearly communicate, so there''s to way to know if they are happy, or whether they spend every day in misery.

Vesper,

I thought about that just after I hit submit on this post.... I didn''t mean to imply that my child (if he/she had any of the conditions spoken of here) would be able to speak for sure, simply that the opportunity to speak would be present since my child wouldn''t have been killed in the womb.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:53:13 PM
Author: steph72276

Date: 7/27/2009 12:18:53 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/27/2009 12:11:22 PM

Author: steph72276

Fisher, I agree with everything you said. The people that state that they would terminate so that the baby wouldn''t have to suffer are either in denial or uneducated about the abortion process and how it works. The only thing ending a life inside the womb protects is the mother from having to witness and see with her own eyes her child''s death and I guess that makes it easier on some people. I would at least like to be able to hold and comfort my child if they are going to die instead of the way it would be ''taken care of'' inside the womb.

Steph, it''s comments like this that just fuel the fire.


There could be all sorts of comments given in reverse about religious ignorance, but I see people are refraining.


For the record, I am religious. However I am pro choice because I don''t believe in forcing my views upon anyone else, just as I enjoy the freedom to choose what I believe. For me personally, I''m generally pro life, but I do believe in extenuating circumstances - which again, probably leads me to being pro choice.


I do hate the thought of abortion. My friend currently is pregnant with triplets so I was reading up on selective abortion. They inject a chemical ''which causes the heart to stop beating.'' I don''t know...that line just really made me sad.


But as babies develop, their senses develop. An embryo is NOT the same thing as a full term fetus. If this were so, it would be able to survive outside the womb, wouldn''t it? Thus, I have to believe that the pain they feel must be different and it''s a choice of what would be the least painful way to die.

I don''t know how to highlight, but in response to your line about an embryo not being the same as a fetus, the screenings are done between week 11-13 and then results come in a few weeks later, so when you find out about the abnormalities, the baby is already a fetus.

Then is is selective abortion before all of that OK?

And a fetus at 11 weeks is not the same as one at 40 either!

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/27/2009 12:55:56 PM
Author: kennedy




I understand your position and think it''s wonderful you would have the CHOICE to do what you feel so strongly is right for you and your unborn child. That said, shouldn''t other women have the same choice you have to do what they feel is right for them, even if it means terminating the pregnancy? You have every right to feel exactly as you do, but I have to admit that I found the tone of your post somewhat offensive. You seem to imply very strongly that a woman who might choose to terminate her pregnancy in order to spare her child from suffering outside the womb is both selfish and flippant about what can only be seen as a devastating choice. I resent the implication that those who feel differently than you do ''value life'' to a lesser degree. My heart goes out to any woman who has ever been in the awful position of having to make a choice like this and would never suggest that one decision is easier than another. That, to me, is not valuing the life of the mother.

Not to mention the word "killing."

I know people have strong opinions, but watch how you phrase things for goodness sake.

Fisher, out of curiosity, are you opposed to IVF as well?

 

[steph72276]

Date: 7/27/2009 1:23:56 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/27/2009 12:53:13 PM

Author: steph72276

Date: 7/27/2009 12:18:53 PM

Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/27/2009 12:11:22 PM


Author: steph72276


Fisher, I agree with everything you said. The people that state that they would terminate so that the baby wouldn't have to suffer are either in denial or uneducated about the abortion process and how it works. The only thing ending a life inside the womb protects is the mother from having to witness and see with her own eyes her child's death and I guess that makes it easier on some people. I would at least like to be able to hold and comfort my child if they are going to die instead of the way it would be 'taken care of' inside the womb.

Steph, it's comments like this that just fuel the fire.



There could be all sorts of comments given in reverse about religious ignorance, but I see people are refraining.



For the record, I am religious. However I am pro choice because I don't believe in forcing my views upon anyone else, just as I enjoy the freedom to choose what I believe. For me personally, I'm generally pro life, but I do believe in extenuating circumstances - which again, probably leads me to being pro choice.



I do hate the thought of abortion. My friend currently is pregnant with triplets so I was reading up on selective abortion. They inject a chemical 'which causes the heart to stop beating.' I don't know...that line just really made me sad.



But as babies develop, their senses develop. An embryo is NOT the same thing as a full term fetus. If this were so, it would be able to survive outside the womb, wouldn't it? Thus, I have to believe that the pain they feel must be different and it's a choice of what would be the least painful way to die.

I don't know how to highlight, but in response to your line about an embryo not being the same as a fetus, the screenings are done between week 11-13 and then results come in a few weeks later, so when you find out about the abnormalities, the baby is already a fetus.

Then is is selective abortion before all of that OK?


And a fetus at 11 weeks is not the same as one at 40 either!

No! Abortion at any stage is not okay with ME PERSONALLY in MY OPINION. I just wasn't sure what point you were making when you said an embryo wasn't the same as a fetus....it doesn't really have anything to do with this post as it is pertaining to abnormalities found after the baby is already a fetus. And I could be off base with this, but the research I have done says that amnios are usually done around week 20 with results taking weeks, thus the baby could be viable outside the womb when the results are learned. Did I miss a point you were trying to make? If so, sorry!