Feelings Amniocentesis Results...

[kennedy]

Date: 7/27/2009 4:57:21 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/27/2009 4:39:12 PM

Author: fisherofmengirly


I do have compassion for everyone, I said I had *more* for people in the other situation, Tgal. Nutty Octomon included. I''d be insane to have her number of children running around in front of me, for sure!


I don''t think any life is more important over another, that''s the point. It is the root of the whole abortion issue. Sure people can say life isn''t life until there is an actual baby outside of the womb, but I don''t know anyone who denies there is LIFE within, babies move, kick, grow, develop. Sure there is an expansion of the life and a lot more development and a higher range of organs working along the timeline of prenatal development, but you simply cannot have no life prior to birth and *bing!* baby''s born, and there''s life. Even science explains that. That''s just another example of the sugarcoating that goes into making things more and more socially acceptable. I would rather make my point than sugarcoat, and I do think that says a lot. I however, do not make a point of being rude or incompassionate, and I have done neither here.


I''ve made no comments about anyone''s ability to parent, their ability to use impressive vocabulary, nor have I stated that any views not in alignment with mine are offensive. I''ve simply pointed out a viewpoint in the world of abortion, and no matter what disabilities a person has, that person doesn''t deserve any less than it''s mother or anyone deserves.

And I''ll maintain that saying here (on PS) that women who had abortions are killing babies is quite incompassionate. And my opinion that your vocab must not be very impressive if you couldn''t think of another way to put it (especially since you insisted on putting it that way) was my way of saying that I think it''s rude. And no, I have never had an abortion.


Are you so vocal when it comes to women doing IVF? Would you tell them they are killing lives if they don''t use those embryos? I mean, it''s a life, right? You wouldn''t sugarcoat it if a dear friend was going through the process, would you?


I DO agree with you that there is life before birth. What I don''t agree with is that everyone should value that life the same way you do (nor am I saying you are making that argument).


And on the note of bringing in children with death sentences - I would rather in the case of something like taysachs opt to give that child a more humane death in the womb than watch her as she ceases to have the ability to swallow (something we don''t even think about and do everyday), become blind, deaf, paralyzed and die a horrible death. But that''s just me.

A big fat DITTO to Tgal''s post!

Fisher -- I don''t mean to pick on you, but I am honestly shocked that can''t see how your posts might be offensive to the many decent women who have had abortions for one reason or another. Let me be clear -- I never said that your views are offensive; what I said is that the way you''re communicating those views is offensive. There''s a very big difference there. I absolutely support your right NEVER to have an abortion, even if it means bringing a baby into the world only to die a painful death. If you were my friend, I would be there for you every step of the way and would never once suggest you should terminate the pregnancy if that didn''t feel right to you. You, however, have said in no uncertain terms that abortion, under any circumstances, is killing; therefore, in your eyes, any woman who decides to have an abortion is a baby killer, right? This would be a bit like me saying that it''s child abuse for anyone to knowingly give birth to a baby who will surely die a painful death. Might you feel a bit offended by that? If so, perhaps you can see better where I''m coming from.

ETA And, for the record, I am a mom to a wonderful 2 year old little girl and have never had an abortion.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

Kennedy,

I don't feel picked on, and I'm not offended by what anyone has said in regard to my stance on this topic, nor on how I have responded in my posts. The thing is that the whole topic of abortion has become so euphamized to downgrade what the procedure is: the ending of a pregnancy, when a pregnancy is the development of a child, a life, a baby. So, if a pregnancy is "terminated," that pregnancy, life, baby is terminated, and a synonym for terminate is end, and the end of life is death, and when a person reaches death by the means of a procedure, that is an act of killing that life. So it's not a wrong term to use at all, but it is one that people find "offensive" because it isn't as soft as the term that makes the procedure seem like you're just getting rid of some vague thing that could maybe, possibly be a child one day, perhaps. That's ridiculous.

So if my using a term (and I've not once said "baby killer," nor "murder" or "murderer" and I wouldn't, as I don't feel those are appropriate terms because they do lead to accusations and name bashing and things of that nature) to describe the act of what is an abortion is offensive, so be it. I've not called anyone who's had the procedure anything, I've simply stated what the procedure leads to, and that is in no uncertain terms, death.

As for Tgal's question regarding IVF and how I feel about that and how I would react/respond/interact with a friend looking at IVF, I have in fact been in this situation and have also posted about it on the TTC thread. I'm not mean (as I have not been here, no matter how people choose to see the use of amore descriptive term of "terminate"), but I also hold to the values of what life is. I do have friends who have underwent both IVF and abortion, and they don't see me as disrespectful at all, but they are aware of the standpoint I hold. And funny enough, two of the friends who've underwent abortion are now against the procedure as well.

Anyway, sugarcoating hard topics is what leads to bleary lines, which is why people think a baby isn't a baby when it's tethered to its mother. Or that a baby is only a baby when it's wanted and healthy, and all other times the baby is some dispensible formation.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:11:52 AM
Author: fisherofmengirly
Kennedy,

I don''t feel picked on, and I''m not offended by what anyone has said in regard to my stance on this topic, nor on how I have responded in my posts. The thing is that the whole topic of abortion has become so euphamized to downgrade what the procedure is: the ending of a pregnancy, when a pregnancy is the development of a child, a life, a baby. So, if a pregnancy is ''terminated,'' that pregnancy, life, baby is terminated, and a synonym for terminate is end, and the end of life is death, and when a person reaches death by the means of a procedure, that is an act of killing that life. So it''s not a wrong term to use at all, but it is one that people find ''offensive'' because it isn''t as soft as the term that makes the procedure seem like you''re just getting rid of some vague thing that could maybe, possibly be a child one day, perhaps. That''s ridiculous.

So if my using a term (and I''ve not once said ''baby killer,'' nor ''murder'' or ''murderer'' and I wouldn''t, as I don''t feel those are appropriate terms because they do lead to accusations and name bashing and things of that nature) to describe the act of what is an abortion is offensive, so be it. I''ve not called anyone who''s had the procedure anything, I''ve simply stated what the procedure leads to, and that is in no uncertain terms, death.

As for Tgal''s question regarding IVF and how I feel about that and how I would react/respond/interact with a friend looking at IVF, I have in fact been in this situation and have also posted about it on the TTC thread. I''m not mean (as I have not been here, no matter how people choose to see the use of amore descriptive term of ''terminate''), but I also hold to the values of what life is. I do have friends who have underwent both IVF and abortion, and they don''t see me as disrespectful at all, but they are aware of the standpoint I hold. And funny enough, two of the friends who''ve underwent abortion are now against the procedure as well.

Anyway, sugarcoating hard topics is what leads to bleary lines, which is why people think a baby isn''t a baby when it''s tethered to its mother. Or that a baby is only a baby when it''s wanted and healthy, and all other times the baby is some dispensible formation.

You have said, it would literally kill you to "kill your child." So if someone has an abortion, they killed their baby - which makes them a baby killer, right? C''mon Fisher, do the math.

I''ll tell ya what Fisher - I am not an offline person. I am on a networking site with some of the moms here and have been for awhile. People sort of know that I don''t want to be bothered because I''d rather do all my talking here. But today, I received more than one email (one from a person who hunted me out and who I am not networked with) to tell me how offended they were by you. So please know that you ARE offending and hurting women on this board. If you don''t care about that, and would rather go on making your point about this, I think you don''t know your audience here. I''m sure there are many other online forums you can debate this issue and tell people they are killing their unborn child.

I''ll tell ya what...last year we made the very painful decision not to give my father what he needed to continue living. He was in a lot of pain and my mom was doing everything she could, but it wasn''t enough. We opted to not give him the drugs and interventions he needed to keep on going. Did I kill my father? Or did we make a thought out, caring decision to help terminate his life?

 

[LtlFirecracker]

I went through the thread and saw Anchors story, and kind of felt like I needed to clarify my views. I know not everyone will agree with my views, but I do not mean all premies. Please realize I come from a view point where I am seeing these children more than the parents, and I see the stuff they don't see (because we have them step out for the tough stuff), and I am talking about the age where our the limits of our medical care is being tested right now. That may change in 5-10 years, but right now this is where we are at. After 25 weeks, I don't think there is much choice in the matter, the outcomes go up significantly, the NICU course gets better for most babies, and I would at least want to give it a shot. If I were pregnant and delivered at 30 weeks, I would not be thrilled, but would actually breathe a sigh of relief that I made it that far, and would expect full support (which is standard of care at that gestational age). Many of the 30 week premies I took care of ended up doing very well. The Neo who helped me figure this out is truly in the profession to save babies, that is what his mission is. But he knows that he can't save them all.

BTW - Anchor - you have overcome a lot and I think you would be a great example to children with developmental challenges to overcome.

 

[packrat]

One of my coworkers has a brother whose wife had a baby a few months ago. Little girl, and she was born with just a brain stem, I believe. Nothing showed up on any tests, and she said it was just some random thing that happened. They didn''t know until after the baby was born (or maybe right in the middle of labor, they realized something was wrong, I can''t remember). She said the baby will grow, but she''ll just be a baby. But, the way I understand it, a baby that can''t see, hear, I think she''s fed thru a tube, never smile, coo, anything. She said she''s basically like a shell. The doctors don''t know how long she''ll live, so they just take it day by day. I asked her the other day how her brother and his wife are doing, and how they cope with it, and she said they just "do". They hold her and treasure each second with her..but she also said that when they (and I don''t know if she meant "they" as in her brother/his wife, or "they" as in my coworker and the other members of the family) had almost hoped the baby would just stop breathing right after she was born, so it would just be over peacefully and her brother/his wife wouldn''t have to go thru this.

I just can''t imagine something like that happening. It''s beyond my ability to comprehend how a parent makes it thru something like that.

I''m thankful I never had to make any decisions, whether it be regarding a handicap like Down''s, or finding out there was something fatally wrong with my babies. My heart goes out to those that do.

 

[steph72276]

I just wanted to write in this thread today now that I''m not so emotional about it and clear some points up. First of all, I am deeply compassionate toward any family that finds out there is anything wrong with their little one. As parents, of course this is not something we would ever choose for our children. I think when you have experienced the loss of a child that was deeply wanted or facing fertility issues when you so desperately want a child, a thread like this can stir deep emotions.

I want to say that I would still never abort a child as I feel that it is not my job to decide it''s fate. I do however, understand the feelings of those that are faced with the news of fatal defects wanting to spare their child additional pain and suffering. I think what really hurts my heart down to the core is the gray area where a child might be born with Down''s or some other non life threatening disease and the parents choose to abort. It just seems to me that when you decide to have children, you have to be willing to take care of the child you were blessed with, even if they are not perfect. But then again, these are my feelings and I realize not everyone places the same value on a life inside the womb that I do. I also realize that nothing I type here will change anyone''s feelings on the matter, but I do feel grateful to have a place to state my opinion as well as listen to other people that have a different outlook.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:24:49 AM
Author: packrat
One of my coworkers has a brother whose wife had a baby a few months ago. Little girl, and she was born with just a brain stem, I believe. Nothing showed up on any tests, and she said it was just some random thing that happened. They didn''t know until after the baby was born (or maybe right in the middle of labor, they realized something was wrong, I can''t remember). She said the baby will grow, but she''ll just be a baby. But, the way I understand it, a baby that can''t see, hear, I think she''s fed thru a tube, never smile, coo, anything. She said she''s basically like a shell. The doctors don''t know how long she''ll live, so they just take it day by day. I asked her the other day how her brother and his wife are doing, and how they cope with it, and she said they just ''do''. They hold her and treasure each second with her..but she also said that when they (and I don''t know if she meant ''they'' as in her brother/his wife, or ''they'' as in my coworker and the other members of the family) had almost hoped the baby would just stop breathing right after she was born, so it would just be over peacefully and her brother/his wife wouldn''t have to go thru this.

I just can''t imagine something like that happening. It''s beyond my ability to comprehend how a parent makes it thru something like that.

I''m thankful I never had to make any decisions, whether it be regarding a handicap like Down''s, or finding out there was something fatally wrong with my babies. My heart goes out to those that do.

I almost am hesitant to post this link because I know it''s going to cause a firestorm, but this is something that I found yesterday when I was researching this subject online. In 2006 The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecology in Great Britain issued a set of recommendations suggesting that doctors use euthanasia to kill newborn babies who are born prematurely and have severe brain damage or major physical problems. The reason I''m posting is because of the tragic story that packrat posted above - my heart goes out to that poor family.

Obviously, there''s been a huge ethical controversy over this, but I thought this info was relevant to this conversation. Here''s the link: http://www.lifenews.com/bio1848.html Apparently this idea is more embraced in northern Europe than in the US, but I thought it was relevant to the conversation.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Vesper,

Interesting article. My opinion is that babies, once they are born, should be treated the same as adults when it comes to end of life issues. If euthanasia is not legal for adults, I don't think it should be legal for babies.

However, everywhere I have trained it is ok to withdraw support if you realize the baby is going to die or have a horrific condition to live with (usually this comes up in babies with very severe brain damage, or a horrific genetic condition like trisomy 13). The easiest to withdraw is the breathing tube, and it is legal to give narcotics to stop the any pain even if that means you will speed up death. That is done in almost every case of withdraw. The baby who is on a feeding tube, but has no cortex is harder. There is nothing wrong with removing the feeding tube and allowing nature to take its course, but I think that would be much harder for a parent because it is much slower than something like the breathing tube.

We see withdraw the same as non-intervention. Just because life support is started, doesn't mean you have to continue it. There was a baby born without kidneys (a lethal condition) and the parents insisted everything be done. So everything was done until the parents could see how badly everything was going, than they agreed with withdraw.

 

[kennedy]

Date: 7/28/2009 8:53:25 AM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 7/28/2009 1:24:49 AM

Author: packrat

One of my coworkers has a brother whose wife had a baby a few months ago. Little girl, and she was born with just a brain stem, I believe. Nothing showed up on any tests, and she said it was just some random thing that happened. They didn''t know until after the baby was born (or maybe right in the middle of labor, they realized something was wrong, I can''t remember). She said the baby will grow, but she''ll just be a baby. But, the way I understand it, a baby that can''t see, hear, I think she''s fed thru a tube, never smile, coo, anything. She said she''s basically like a shell. The doctors don''t know how long she''ll live, so they just take it day by day. I asked her the other day how her brother and his wife are doing, and how they cope with it, and she said they just ''do''. They hold her and treasure each second with her..but she also said that when they (and I don''t know if she meant ''they'' as in her brother/his wife, or ''they'' as in my coworker and the other members of the family) had almost hoped the baby would just stop breathing right after she was born, so it would just be over peacefully and her brother/his wife wouldn''t have to go thru this.


I just can''t imagine something like that happening. It''s beyond my ability to comprehend how a parent makes it thru something like that.


I''m thankful I never had to make any decisions, whether it be regarding a handicap like Down''s, or finding out there was something fatally wrong with my babies. My heart goes out to those that do.

I almost am hesitant to post this link because I know it''s going to cause a firestorm, but this is something that I found yesterday when I was researching this subject online. In 2006 The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecology in Great Britain issued a set of recommendations suggesting that doctors use euthanasia to kill newborn babies who are born prematurely and have severe brain damage or major physical problems. The reason I''m posting is because of the tragic story that packrat posted above - my heart goes out to that poor family.


Obviously, there''s been a huge ethical controversy over this, but I thought this info was relevant to this conversation. Here''s the link: http://www.lifenews.com/bio1848.html Apparently this idea is more embraced in northern Europe than in the US, but I thought it was relevant to the conversation.

Thanks for the link, Vesper. Interesting how the mentality differs in Europe. Can you imagine if the AAP even suggested something like this!?!

I did, however, want to point out that that article was featured on an anti-abortion website, which is why the language/presentation seemed so biased. Here''s a link to an article about the same topic by a more legitimate news source:
Times London

 

[waxing lyrical]

Firecracker, is that condition you''re referring to renal agenesis? I read a story about a baby born with that condition. She only lived a couple hours.

I take it you''re an OB? In cases where you know there are fatal abnormalities how do you usually proceed with extra monitoring? I''ve read different stories about this. I read a story of one woman who was induced at 35 or 36 or so weeks. She received BPP and NSTs for several weeks to monitor her baby''s condition. She wanted to avoid having a stillbirth and wanted to be induced whenever her perinatologist felt the baby''s condition was declining. Would this be something considered in these cases?

I sometimes wonder if that would have been something we could have considered if we had known sooner.

 

[QueenB29]

Wow. This thread has garnered a lot of attention and controversy. I think it''s great how everyone is talking about it freely, and it really got me thinking. I really hope I don''t offend anyone with my post. If I do, I apologize.

I''m not TTC yet (won''t be for at least another year), and DH and I haven''t discussed the topic. I''m Catholic and attended Catholic school for 12 years. While I consider myself pro-life, and believe abortion should never be used as birth control, I don''t think the issue is black and white. (And I certainly don''t follow the Church''s teachings on everything as I use artificial BC.)

I realized this one year when our parish priest came into our religion class to talk about birth control and abortion. Someone asked, ''What if a woman was raped?'' and he said, ''Well, when women are raped, their bodies shut down and they can''t conceive." Um excuse me?! He must have had too much sacrificial wine.

I thank God that I have never been in that situation, and I would like to think that I would choose to continue the pregnancy. But since I haven''t experienced that, I can''t actually say what I would do, and I would NEVER tell a woman who was raped or the victim of incest that she shouldn''t get an abortion.

I kind of feel the same about terminating a pregnancy based on the health of the baby. I would like to say that I would continue it if the baby had Downs Syndrome, Spina Bifida, etc, but I can''t possibly sit here today and say what I would do. I have a lot of my own health issues, and I''m not sure my husband and I are emotionally equipped to handle a mentally-disabled child. Hopefully we would rise to the occasion. If, God forbid, it was an issue where the baby would only live a short time after birth and suffer terribly, I probably would terminate. I do know that I would find out as much information as I could about whatever condition it was, and talk to doctors and parents who had children with that disability, as well as my family members and my priest. And I would pray, a lot.

But again, I can''t sit here and say that one decision is right and another is wrong because I haven''t been there and hopefully never will be. I''m sure that it''s a gut-wrenching, heartbreaking decision either way and I feel terrible for anyone who has to experience it. And it''s possible that the woman the original poster described will change her mind further into the pregnancy, when she sees the ultrasound and the concept of a baby becomes less abstract.

 

[Mandarine]

Date: 7/28/2009 11:23:26 AM
Author: QueenB29
Wow. This thread has garnered a lot of attention and controversy. I think it''s great how everyone is talking about it freely, and it really got me thinking. I really hope I don''t offend anyone with my post. If I do, I apologize.

I''m not TTC yet (won''t be for at least another year), and DH and I haven''t discussed the topic. I''m Catholic and attended Catholic school for 12 years. While I consider myself pro-life, and believe abortion should never be used as birth control, I don''t think the issue is black and white. (And I certainly don''t follow the Church''s teachings on everything as I use artificial BC.)

I realized this one year when our parish priest came into our religion class to talk about birth control and abortion. Someone asked, ''What if a woman was raped?'' and he said, ''Well, when women are raped, their bodies shut down and they can''t conceive.'' Um excuse me?! He must have had too much sacrificial wine.

I thank God that I have never been in that situation, and I would like to think that I would choose to continue the pregnancy. But since I haven''t experienced that, I can''t actually say what I would do, and I would NEVER tell a woman who was raped or the victim of incest that she shouldn''t get an abortion.

I kind of feel the same about terminating a pregnancy based on the health of the baby. I would like to say that I would continue it if the baby had Downs Syndrome, Spina Bifida, etc, but I can''t possibly sit here today and say what I would do. I have a lot of my own health issues, and I''m not sure my husband and I are emotionally equipped to handle a mentally-disabled child. Hopefully we would rise to the occasion. If, God forbid, it was an issue where the baby would only live a short time after birth and suffer terribly, I probably would terminate. I do know that I would find out as much information as I could about whatever condition it was, and talk to doctors and parents who had children with that disability, as well as my family members and my priest. And I would pray, a lot.

But again, I can''t sit here and say that one decision is right and another is wrong because I haven''t been there and hopefully never will be. I''m sure that it''s a gut-wrenching, heartbreaking decision either way and I feel terrible for anyone who has to experience it. And it''s possible that the woman the original poster described will change her mind further into the pregnancy, when she sees the ultrasound and the concept of a baby becomes less abstract.

Exactly how I feel about it.

I think for anyone to judge or say they wouldn''t do X or Y is just unfair....because well, we haven''t been in those situations (and hopefully never will).

I opted to do sequential testing for the twins (even though I know the results are not always accurate when it comes to twins)...the results came back with very low risk levels and that helped ease my mind --although I know it''s not 100%. I guess I just trust and pray that everything is ok. I didn''t do amnio or CVS and probably wouldn''t have done it with one either if the results came back with very low risk levels.

I see how someone can get offended by some of the terms used here. Yes, this is a free forum, but these are TOUGH and heartbreaking decisions for those involved. I''m not saying don''t voice your opinions...just be tactful of what/how you voice them and let''s keep that sensitivity chip on.

 

[cara]

''Killing babies'' or ''killing life'' is highly judgmental, highly loaded language. Fisher, you don''t get to decide what is offensive to other people. While your personal opinion is that words like ''murderer'' and ''baby killer'' are offensive and you woln''t use them, but anything less intense than ''killing life'' or ''killing a baby'' is sugar-coating it and so you stick to the ''killing life'' term. Other people may not draw these lines where you draw them, and to use such highly loaded language and to repeatedly question people that hold a different view (such as when you asked, ''Tgal, do you seriously not think of abortion as killing life?...''), well, it changes the tone of the discussion and these boards.

Maybe that is your point - you feel so strongly that you don''t mind changing the tone of the boards. But there are consequences. There is a more antagonistic environment left for the people that see things differently than you do and engage, many people will not engage because they see it differently than you do and don''t want to feel judged and uncomfortable. Maybe that is OK with you - offend the people that see it differently and make them feel judged and uncomfortable because you woln''t sugarcoat it for them. But all I can say is that it makes me sad - part of what makes pricescope so different than a lot of other boards is the level of respect shown to people with different opinions. Especially on the family boards; people discuss deeply personal stuff and that only works in a caring, respectful environment. I don''t know if you read at all on the all-around-the-world board here on ps before the political topics ban. It was fun, but it was highly antagonistic and curt and extremely different than the rest of ps. People didn''t respect each other''s opinions, one''s posts would often not be read in one''s favor, it was brutal, snarky, cutting writing and completely different in tone than many other pages on ps. Which is why the mods banned political topics, and it is a good thing in terms of preserving the positive tone of the other pages. Which brings us back to the abortion stuff here.

Abortion is probably a more divisive topic than most political issues. Most adults have thought about abortion and life issues and have their own opinion and it is not easily changeable. To have a shouting match on the issue (not saying that we have, but one could easily see how it might happen), to use judgmental language when questioning others opinions, it seems a poor use of ps. Not because what we really need is more sugarcoating in this world, to coddle people from the harsh things they discuss, but because having a diverse group of people sharing their lives and opinions in a respectful, open forum requires a certain amount of discretion and respect. This thread is on a difficult topic, there is a lot of insight to be had in hearing people''s experiences and opinions, it seems impossible to adequately address the topic without discussing abortion, but still. I hope it is possible to discuss without descending into another abortion battle. I''ll give my attempt at a reply later.

 

[Lauren8211]

Date: 7/28/2009 11:59:44 AM
Author: cara
''Killing babies'' or ''killing life'' is highly judgmental, highly loaded language. Fisher, you don''t get to decide what is offensive to other people. While your personal opinion is that words like ''murderer'' and ''baby killer'' are offensive and you woln''t use them, but anything less intense than ''killing life'' or ''killing a baby'' is sugar-coating it and so you stick to the ''killing life'' term. Other people may not draw these lines where you draw them, and to use such highly loaded language and to repeatedly question people that hold a different view (such as when you asked, ''Tgal, do you seriously not think of abortion as killing life?...''), well, it changes the tone of the discussion and these boards.

Maybe that is your point - you feel so strongly that you don''t mind changing the tone of the boards. But there are consequences. There is a more antagonistic environment left for the people that see things differently than you do and engage, many people will not engage because they see it differently than you do and don''t want to feel judged and uncomfortable. Maybe that is OK with you - offend the people that see it differently and make them feel judged and uncomfortable because you woln''t sugarcoat it for them. But all I can say is that it makes me sad - part of what makes pricescope so different than a lot of other boards is the level of respect shown to people with different opinions. Especially on the family boards; people discuss deeply personal stuff and that only works in a caring, respectful environment. I don''t know if you read at all on the all-around-the-world board here on ps before the political topics ban. It was fun, but it was highly antagonistic and curt and extremely different than the rest of ps. People didn''t respect each other''s opinions, one''s posts would often not be read in one''s favor, it was brutal, snarky, cutting writing and completely different in tone than many other pages on ps. Which is why the mods banned political topics, and it is a good thing in terms of preserving the positive tone of the other pages. Which brings us back to the abortion stuff here.

Abortion is probably a more divisive topic than most political issues. Most adults have thought about abortion and life issues and have their own opinion and it is not easily changeable. To have a shouting match on the issue (not saying that we have, but one could easily see how it might happen), to use judgmental language when questioning others opinions, it seems a poor use of ps. Not because what we really need is more sugarcoating in this world, to coddle people from the harsh things they discuss, but because having a diverse group of people sharing their lives and opinions in a respectful, open forum requires a certain amount of discretion and respect. This thread is on a difficult topic, there is a lot of insight to be had in hearing people''s experiences and opinions, it seems impossible to adequately address the topic without discussing abortion, but still. I hope it is possible to discuss without descending into another abortion battle. I''ll give my attempt at a reply later.

I was lurking on this thread, and Cara.. thanks for stating all of that. You said exactly what I wish I could have. Very well stated.

 

[blushingbride]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:09:45 PM
Author: elledizzy5

Date: 7/28/2009 11:59:44 AM
Author: cara
''Killing babies'' or ''killing life'' is highly judgmental, highly loaded language. Fisher, you don''t get to decide what is offensive to other people. While your personal opinion is that words like ''murderer'' and ''baby killer'' are offensive and you woln''t use them, but anything less intense than ''killing life'' or ''killing a baby'' is sugar-coating it and so you stick to the ''killing life'' term. Other people may not draw these lines where you draw them, and to use such highly loaded language and to repeatedly question people that hold a different view (such as when you asked, ''Tgal, do you seriously not think of abortion as killing life?...''), well, it changes the tone of the discussion and these boards.

Maybe that is your point - you feel so strongly that you don''t mind changing the tone of the boards. But there are consequences. There is a more antagonistic environment left for the people that see things differently than you do and engage, many people will not engage because they see it differently than you do and don''t want to feel judged and uncomfortable. Maybe that is OK with you - offend the people that see it differently and make them feel judged and uncomfortable because you woln''t sugarcoat it for them. But all I can say is that it makes me sad - part of what makes pricescope so different than a lot of other boards is the level of respect shown to people with different opinions. Especially on the family boards; people discuss deeply personal stuff and that only works in a caring, respectful environment. I don''t know if you read at all on the all-around-the-world board here on ps before the political topics ban. It was fun, but it was highly antagonistic and curt and extremely different than the rest of ps. People didn''t respect each other''s opinions, one''s posts would often not be read in one''s favor, it was brutal, snarky, cutting writing and completely different in tone than many other pages on ps. Which is why the mods banned political topics, and it is a good thing in terms of preserving the positive tone of the other pages. Which brings us back to the abortion stuff here.

Abortion is probably a more divisive topic than most political issues. Most adults have thought about abortion and life issues and have their own opinion and it is not easily changeable. To have a shouting match on the issue (not saying that we have, but one could easily see how it might happen), to use judgmental language when questioning others opinions, it seems a poor use of ps. Not because what we really need is more sugarcoating in this world, to coddle people from the harsh things they discuss, but because having a diverse group of people sharing their lives and opinions in a respectful, open forum requires a certain amount of discretion and respect. This thread is on a difficult topic, there is a lot of insight to be had in hearing people''s experiences and opinions, it seems impossible to adequately address the topic without discussing abortion, but still. I hope it is possible to discuss without descending into another abortion battle. I''ll give my attempt at a reply later.

I was lurking on this thread, and Cara.. thanks for stating all of that. You said exactly what I wish I could have. Very well stated.

Ditto to the above. To be honest, I started reading this thread becaue I was really curious as to whether or not I should have an amnio when the time comes and was curious as to what other PSers had done. Considering I just went through a miscarriage, I am trying to gain as much knowledge as I can on this subject since I know the risks with the amino. I was hoping this thread wasn''t going to turn the direction it did.

 

[cara]

Would I do the amnio? Not sure at my current age but yes if I was older. I think I would want to know in any case but if the odds (of finding something wrong through the amnio) are quite low maybe the amnio-associated miscarriage risk (extremely minimal though it is) wouldn't be worth it. Currently, I would do the screening test and then evaluate those odds prior to deciding on the amnio. We would terminate for some conditions but are not precisely sure where the line is. No termination for reasonably simple conditions correctable by surgery - cleft palate, certain heart issues - would terminate for certain instantly terminal conditions or near-term terminal conditions with a lot of suffering involved like Tay-Sachs. Not sure where we would be on Down's syndrome but that is not the scariest condition by any means, even though many Down's cases are more severe such as waxing's child. Certain conditions that you can't test for actually scare me more - like autism. How does one deal with that? Just the financial aspect alone is mindnumbing. Ah, being a parent. Just when I think I am ready, I am reminded you can't be ready.

The example that got me thinking about when to terminate when I was younger was similar to packrat's example - it was a fetus with the brain growing outside the skull. No hope of survival outside the womb, since at least as I recall the article even the brain stem was outside the skull. To me, that is a condition I would terminate. The fetus might be living human tissue with a unique genetic combination, but it has no hope of becoming a living, breathing baby. Then the emotional and physical costs to the parent(s) of continuing the pregnancy outweigh (for me) the negligible chance of a positive outcome for the fetus. Of course, like the OP's example, I can be cold and clinical now but I am sure it would be an immensely heartbreaking experience to go through. And also I am not completely sure of the emotional component and how that would interact with the possible treatment options - maybe for some terminal conditions with less suffering involved I would consider early induction or continuing the pregnancy to be able meet the little one - something I hadn't really thought about as an option until waxing mentioned it...

OK, final poll question: Of those that wouldn't terminate no matter what, would you want to know anyway or would you rather be in the dark? This is always an interesting one for me, because there is the Sarah Palin I-want-to-be-prepared camp (with the associated thought that having horrible surprise on your child's birthday is a bad idea), and the what-will-be-will-be so why worry or test early camp.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Date: 7/26/2009 6:35:04 PM
Author: 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.

I am in peds, I am in a resident program that is very NICU heavy, meaning I have done more NICU months than the average pediatric resident. All of these NICU issues have forced me to face these questions personally, as I love children and really want them, and these cases break my heart.

Yes, this was a case of renal agenesis, which leads to something called Potter''s sequence. The failure of the kidneys to develop means that the baby does not urinate in utero, which means there is no amniotic fluid. This is bad because amniotic fluid is necessary for lung development, so when these babies are born, there are basically no lungs to ventilate. They are too little and too sick to even think about transplant with. Basically the recommindation for these babies is confort care. This was a unique case where the parents were unwilling to listen to anyone. The OB''s tried to schedule several meetings and they often did not show up.

There are many ways to deal with a baby with a lethal condition once it is known. Some parents choose a live premature delivery and than to allow natural death (I think I would perfer this over abortion, if it would be possible). I have one friend is is very very pro life. I always thought if she had a special needs kid, she would do everything even it it wasn''t practical. I was proven wrong, when sadely, she was confronted with this issue. She had a baby with trisomy 18. She was agaist abortion, but knew survial was slim. She felt she should not interfear with "the ultimate plan" for the baby. So she did not abort, but she also did not intervene. She let things happen naturally. I think she made a great choice. She can sleep at night knowing she did not go against her personal beliefs, and her baby got to spend the few minutes he had being held and loved.

As for the OBs, they can only monitor the baby so much. Even with weekly checks, things can be missed. And inductions sometimes failed. Often times babies are not closly monitored unless the plan is full intervention because an emergency delivery puts the mother at high risk. I have seen mothers not get to meet their baby because the delivery required a crash c-section that required general ansthesia, and the mothers don''t wake up in time. It is heartbreaking, but reaility. I am not sure that changing the way you did things would have allowed you to meet your baby. Without knowing everything, I think you did everything you can do, and at least did get time with your baby when the baby was a part of you.

 

[Mara]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:30:06 PM
Author: blushingbride

Date: 7/28/2009 12:09:45 PM
Author: elledizzy5

Date: 7/28/2009 11:59:44 AM
Author: cara
''Killing babies'' or ''killing life'' is highly judgmental, highly loaded language. Fisher, you don''t get to decide what is offensive to other people. While your personal opinion is that words like ''murderer'' and ''baby killer'' are offensive and you woln''t use them, but anything less intense than ''killing life'' or ''killing a baby'' is sugar-coating it and so you stick to the ''killing life'' term. Other people may not draw these lines where you draw them, and to use such highly loaded language and to repeatedly question people that hold a different view (such as when you asked, ''Tgal, do you seriously not think of abortion as killing life?...''), well, it changes the tone of the discussion and these boards.

Maybe that is your point - you feel so strongly that you don''t mind changing the tone of the boards. But there are consequences. There is a more antagonistic environment left for the people that see things differently than you do and engage, many people will not engage because they see it differently than you do and don''t want to feel judged and uncomfortable. Maybe that is OK with you - offend the people that see it differently and make them feel judged and uncomfortable because you woln''t sugarcoat it for them. But all I can say is that it makes me sad - part of what makes pricescope so different than a lot of other boards is the level of respect shown to people with different opinions. Especially on the family boards; people discuss deeply personal stuff and that only works in a caring, respectful environment. I don''t know if you read at all on the all-around-the-world board here on ps before the political topics ban. It was fun, but it was highly antagonistic and curt and extremely different than the rest of ps. People didn''t respect each other''s opinions, one''s posts would often not be read in one''s favor, it was brutal, snarky, cutting writing and completely different in tone than many other pages on ps. Which is why the mods banned political topics, and it is a good thing in terms of preserving the positive tone of the other pages. Which brings us back to the abortion stuff here.

Abortion is probably a more divisive topic than most political issues. Most adults have thought about abortion and life issues and have their own opinion and it is not easily changeable. To have a shouting match on the issue (not saying that we have, but one could easily see how it might happen), to use judgmental language when questioning others opinions, it seems a poor use of ps. Not because what we really need is more sugarcoating in this world, to coddle people from the harsh things they discuss, but because having a diverse group of people sharing their lives and opinions in a respectful, open forum requires a certain amount of discretion and respect. This thread is on a difficult topic, there is a lot of insight to be had in hearing people''s experiences and opinions, it seems impossible to adequately address the topic without discussing abortion, but still. I hope it is possible to discuss without descending into another abortion battle. I''ll give my attempt at a reply later.

I was lurking on this thread, and Cara.. thanks for stating all of that. You said exactly what I wish I could have. Very well stated.

Ditto to the above. To be honest, I started reading this thread becaue I was really curious as to whether or not I should have an amnio when the time comes and was curious as to what other PSers had done. Considering I just went through a miscarriage, I am trying to gain as much knowledge as I can on this subject since I know the risks with the amino. I was hoping this thread wasn''t going to turn the direction it did.

Thritto and especially to the last line here from blushing bride...

There is a lot of knowledge out there that can be put out for consumption without it denigrating into tossing around some of the terms have been used here multiple times.

vesper that article is interesting. My husband was wondering the other day if eventually we will come to a point where there will be an extremely small number of babies born with known defects because the technology is getting so advanced in terms of the screenings and the diagnostic tests.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:31:59 PM
Author: cara

OK, final poll question: Of those that wouldn''t terminate no matter what, would you want to know anyway or would you rather be in the dark? This is always an interesting one for me, because there is the Sarah Palin I-want-to-be-prepared camp (with the associated thought that having horrible surprise on your child''s birthday is a bad idea), and the what-will-be-will-be so why worry or test early camp.

Cara, knowing what I know now about those first few weeks of motherhood, there is no doubt that I would want to know. It was hard enough with a healthy baby - I fought post partum blues pretty hard for the first 5 weeks. I could not do the exhaustion battle while dealing with the surprise of any abnormalities. I would need the time to mentally prepare myself.

 

[fisherofmengirly]

No, I can''t determine what is offensive to one person over another; I''ve not said I can nor that I would, I simply said my intent was not to offend, and that I wouldn''t back down from what abortion is. If people choose to think of it as merely a removal of uterine lining, but to think of a wanted, healthy baby as a baby, that''s a rationalization made to make a decision easier.

Values are not something that change with the audience you''re with, however. Miriam-Webster defines abortion as: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus. So unless Miriam-Webster is also wrong (as opposed to all the pro-choice sites that merely refer to it as scraping of the uterine lining to terminate a pregnancy), abortion does lead to death, and it''s very intent is death.

It''s horrible that any baby is ever conceived with any issues at all, and I can''t imagine the thoughts and changes having a special needs baby in your home or in your womb could entail. I''ve not been there, but I can say that I wouldn''t opt for an abortion because the outcome of my pregnancy wasn''t going to turn out the way I''d dreamed of. Babies should be born healthy and without any pain or cares in the world, for sure. We don''t always get exactly what we bargained for. Emotions do run deep on this topic, on both sides. It does seriously puzzle me that people actually would believe that abortion doesn''t end in death. I was truly interested when I asked Tgal if she really thought that abortion wasn''t a process that leads to death. I wasn''t asking a loaded question (or not intending to) nor was my intent to be snarky or talking down to her. I suppose the reason "kill" has been posted by me so often has been because I don''t see a difference between that word and death, and I don''t understand why someone would be offended by stating what abortion is. At any rate, if anyone who doesn''t think abortion leads to death, I''d be curious to know what it does mean to you, and for anyone I offended by saying "kill," I am sorry and can only say that my intent was to hurt no one. There are a lot of women here I really care about and have come to know a lot about (a TTC board will do that for sure) and whom I consider great people and while I know many of them don''t adhere to the same values that I do, it''s not mattered to the connection that is shared on this forum (not often, anway

) and I don''t mean to hurt anyone, but perhaps I have (obviously I have if people have gone to Tgal talking about this thread). Forums are an odd medium where ones words can be read and miscontrued or seen with a tone not intended (which I do remember from the ATW thread and even from threads here on F&H). At the same time, I think everyone''s opinions on the topic should be taken into account, and just because someone is in the minority (seemingly, anyway), that should still be something that is able to be posted.

And with that, I will leave my offensive posting (which again had no intent of being offensive) on this thread.

 

[Lilac]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:42:24 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 7/28/2009 12:30:06 PM

Author: blushingbride

Date: 7/28/2009 12:09:45 PM

Author: elledizzy5

Date: 7/28/2009 11:59:44 AM

Author: cara

''Killing babies'' or ''killing life'' is highly judgmental, highly loaded language. Fisher, you don''t get to decide what is offensive to other people. While your personal opinion is that words like ''murderer'' and ''baby killer'' are offensive and you woln''t use them, but anything less intense than ''killing life'' or ''killing a baby'' is sugar-coating it and so you stick to the ''killing life'' term. Other people may not draw these lines where you draw them, and to use such highly loaded language and to repeatedly question people that hold a different view (such as when you asked, ''Tgal, do you seriously not think of abortion as killing life?...''), well, it changes the tone of the discussion and these boards.

Maybe that is your point - you feel so strongly that you don''t mind changing the tone of the boards. But there are consequences. There is a more antagonistic environment left for the people that see things differently than you do and engage, many people will not engage because they see it differently than you do and don''t want to feel judged and uncomfortable. Maybe that is OK with you - offend the people that see it differently and make them feel judged and uncomfortable because you woln''t sugarcoat it for them. But all I can say is that it makes me sad - part of what makes pricescope so different than a lot of other boards is the level of respect shown to people with different opinions. Especially on the family boards; people discuss deeply personal stuff and that only works in a caring, respectful environment. I don''t know if you read at all on the all-around-the-world board here on ps before the political topics ban. It was fun, but it was highly antagonistic and curt and extremely different than the rest of ps. People didn''t respect each other''s opinions, one''s posts would often not be read in one''s favor, it was brutal, snarky, cutting writing and completely different in tone than many other pages on ps. Which is why the mods banned political topics, and it is a good thing in terms of preserving the positive tone of the other pages. Which brings us back to the abortion stuff here.

Abortion is probably a more divisive topic than most political issues. Most adults have thought about abortion and life issues and have their own opinion and it is not easily changeable. To have a shouting match on the issue (not saying that we have, but one could easily see how it might happen), to use judgmental language when questioning others opinions, it seems a poor use of ps. Not because what we really need is more sugarcoating in this world, to coddle people from the harsh things they discuss, but because having a diverse group of people sharing their lives and opinions in a respectful, open forum requires a certain amount of discretion and respect. This thread is on a difficult topic, there is a lot of insight to be had in hearing people''s experiences and opinions, it seems impossible to adequately address the topic without discussing abortion, but still. I hope it is possible to discuss without descending into another abortion battle. I''ll give my attempt at a reply later.

I was lurking on this thread, and Cara.. thanks for stating all of that. You said exactly what I wish I could have. Very well stated.

Ditto to the above. To be honest, I started reading this thread becaue I was really curious as to whether or not I should have an amnio when the time comes and was curious as to what other PSers had done. Considering I just went through a miscarriage, I am trying to gain as much knowledge as I can on this subject since I know the risks with the amino. I was hoping this thread wasn''t going to turn the direction it did.

Thritto and especially to the last line here from blushing bride...

There is a lot of knowledge out there that can be put out for consumption without it denigrating into tossing around some of the terms have been used here multiple times.

vesper that article is interesting. My husband was wondering the other day if eventually we will come to a point where there will be an extremely small number of babies born with known defects because the technology is getting so advanced in terms of the screenings and the diagnostic tests.

I have to agree with all of this. I''ve been lurking on this thread but refrained from posting because there''s a lot being talked about and I was trying to get my thoughts in order. However, I have to say I am not a mother yet nor have I ever had an abortion but I found the use of the term "killing babies" to be extremely offensive. We''re all entitled to our opinions about whether things are right or wrong, but the use of those words just seems very insensitive and antagonistic to me.

 

[TravelingGal]

Fisher since you are such a fan of dictionary definitions, if you go to yahoo (yes, I know, I''m one of the rare few that use yahoo still) and type in "definition of kill", you''ll find that the very first link contains the following:

VERB:
intr.
To cause death or extinction; be fatal.
To commit murder.
Informal To make such a strong impression as to overcome: dress to kill.

Um, perhaps that''s why "kill" is such a loaded word to some?

But you obviously just don''t get it.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:47:57 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly
No, I can''t determine what is offensive to one person over another; I''ve not said I can nor that I would, I simply said my intent was not to offend, and that I wouldn''t back down from what abortion is. If people choose to think of it as merely a removal of uterine lining, but to think of a wanted, healthy baby as a baby, that''s a rationalization made to make a decision easier.

Values are not something that change with the audience you''re with, however. Miriam-Webster defines abortion as: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus. So unless Miriam-Webster is also wrong (as opposed to all the pro-choice sites that merely refer to it as scraping of the uterine lining to terminate a pregnancy), abortion does lead to death, and it''s very intent is death.

It''s horrible that any baby is ever conceived with any issues at all, and I can''t imagine the thoughts and changes having a special needs baby in your home or in your womb could entail. I''ve not been there, but I can say that I wouldn''t opt for an abortion because the outcome of my pregnancy wasn''t going to turn out the way I''d dreamed of. Babies should be born healthy and without any pain or cares in the world, for sure. We don''t always get exactly what we bargained for. Emotions do run deep on this topic, on both sides. It does seriously puzzle me that people actually would believe that abortion doesn''t end in death. I was truly interested when I asked Tgal if she really thought that abortion wasn''t a process that leads to death. I wasn''t asking a loaded question (or not intending to) nor was my intent to be snarky or talking down to her. I suppose the reason ''kill'' has been posted by me so often has been because I don''t see a difference between that word and death, and I don''t understand why someone would be offended by stating what abortion is. At any rate, if anyone who doesn''t think abortion leads to death, I''d be curious to know what it does mean to you, and for anyone I offended by saying ''kill,'' I am sorry and can only say that my intent was to hurt no one. There are a lot of women here I really care about and have come to know a lot about (a TTC board will do that for sure) and whom I consider great people and while I know many of them don''t adhere to the same values that I do, it''s not mattered to the connection that is shared on this forum (not often, anway

) and I don''t mean to hurt anyone, but perhaps I have (obviously I have if people have gone to Tgal talking about this thread). Forums are an odd medium where ones words can be read and miscontrued or seen with a tone not intended (which I do remember from the ATW thread and even from threads here on F&H). At the same time, I think everyone''s opinions on the topic should be taken into account, and just because someone is in the minority (seemingly, anyway), that should still be something that is able to be posted.

And with that, I will leave my offensive posting (which again had no intent of being offensive) on this thread.

And please, that is not what you asked. I would agree (from my point of view) that abortion results the death (or termination of life) of a fetus. Obviously it is no longer living, so life is aborted.

What YOU asked, however, was:

"Tgal, do you seriously not think of abortion as killing life?"

I think that all opinions are welcomed here, when done with some degree of TACT. Steph obviously agrees with you but always clearly said it was in her OPINION and what she felt was right for her. What you did was going around spewing that abortion is killing your unborn baby.

Fisher, intent is not the most important thing in communication. It is PERCEPTION.

 

[waxing lyrical]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:35:02 PM
Author: LtlFirecracker

Date: 7/26/2009 6:35:04 PM

Author: 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.

I am in peds, I am in a resident program that is very NICU heavy, meaning I have done more NICU months than the average pediatric resident. All of these NICU issues have forced me to face these questions personally, as I love children and really want them, and these cases break my heart.


Yes, this was a case of renal agenesis, which leads to something called Potter''s sequence. The failure of the kidneys to develop means that the baby does not urinate in utero, which means there is no amniotic fluid. This is bad because amniotic fluid is necessary for lung development, so when these babies are born, there are basically no lungs to ventilate. They are too little and too sick to even think about transplant with. Basically the recommindation for these babies is confort care. This was a unique case where the parents were unwilling to listen to anyone. The OB''s tried to schedule several meetings and they often did not show up.


There are many ways to deal with a baby with a lethal condition once it is known. Some parents choose a live premature delivery and than to allow natural death (I think I would perfer this over abortion, if it would be possible). I have one friend is is very very pro life. I always thought if she had a special needs kid, she would do everything even it it wasn''t practical. I was proven wrong, when sadely, she was confronted with this issue. She had a baby with trisomy 18. She was agaist abortion, but knew survial was slim. She felt she should not interfear with ''the ultimate plan'' for the baby. So she did not abort, but she also did not intervene. She let things happen naturally. I think she made a great choice. She can sleep at night knowing she did not go against her personal beliefs, and her baby got to spend the few minutes he had being held and loved.


As for the OBs, they can only monitor the baby so much. Even with weekly checks, things can be missed. And inductions sometimes failed. Often times babies are not closly monitored unless the plan is full intervention because an emergency delivery puts the mother at high risk. I have seen mothers not get to meet their baby because the delivery required a crash c-section that required general ansthesia, and the mothers don''t wake up in time. It is heartbreaking, but reaility. I am not sure that changing the way you did things would have allowed you to meet your baby. Without knowing everything, I think you did everything you can do, and at least did get time with your baby when the baby was a part of you.

I''m sure it must be hard to witness heartbreaking cases like that everyday.

I ended up opting to be induced the night we found out. I know there''s the option to wait it out and see if/when labor will occur spontaneously, but I couldn''t fathom waiting and I had a feeling he had been gone at least 2 days. Plus, I highly doubt it would have occurred spontaneously since I had severe polyhydramnios that hindered labor from starting. I knew severe poly and in turn TEF and EA were associated with the trisomies, especially T21. I couldn''t think of any other reason as to what was causing it. Good thing the induction went well and was super fast, though I had a lot of anxiety during that time and hated the whole entire experience. The poly developed quickly and he passed before the scheduled ultrasound. I knew the moment he was born he had Ds. I could just tell. I just don''t think my midwife or others put it together since being 24 isn''t usually seen as high risk for Ds or other trisomies. I wasn''t really surprised because I knew in the back of my head there are more Ds babies born to mothers in my age group.

I think in some cases I would prefer a live premature delivery. I know there are some that prefer this route. Had we known more from the earlier ultrasound live premature delivery would have been something we would have considered. I''m glad he hung on for 35 weeks. The OB that was handling our case was surprised he hung on for that long. Must have been really comfortable in there.

 

[NakedFinger]

I was the OP, and may I say I by NO means expected this or wanted this to turn into an abortion debate. I was simply asking who has/or who would opt for THIS SPECIFIC test, and if so, how did they/or how do they think they would react. I was just curious to see how many people opt for this test, and do they know their take on it already going into it. My FF and I plan on conceiving shortly after getting married, and are trying to get all the "big topics" discussed beforehand. Again, I was just wondering what most women do with THIS TEST (ie: women who are actually pregnant, or will be soon)

So please, political and religious discussions aside. We all have out beliefs and are entitled to them, no need to debate them on a forum especially when I didn't ask "what is your take on abortion?". If you dont like the subject matter (which to remind everyone is an AMNIOCENTESIS TEST), dont post.

Thanks.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:12:49 PM
Author: NakedFinger

I was the OP, and may I say I by NO means expected this or wanted this to turn into an abortion debate. I was simply asking who has/or who would opt for THIS SPECIFIC test, and if so, how did they/or how do they think they would react. I was just curious to see how many people opt for this test, and do they know their take on it already going into it. My FF and I plan on conceiving shortly after getting married, and are trying to get all the ''big topics'' discussed beforehand. Again, I was just wondering what most women do with THIS TEST (ie: women who are actually pregnant, or will be soon)

So please, political and religious discussions aside. We all have out beliefs and are entitled to them, no need to debate them on a forum especially when I didn''t ask ''what is your take on abortion?''. If you dont like the subject matter (which to remind everyone is an AMNIOCENTESIS TEST), dont post.

Thanks.

That is very wise of you. TGuy and I discussed it as well. We didn''t go into details (i.e., yes for trisomy 18, no for tri 21, etc). We just discussed whether termination would be an issue.

One thing that might be a concern to some is the timing of the amnio. I did mine at 17 weeks - I can''t recall if I felt my baby by then, but it was very close (I think I also felt her at 17-18 weeks). Amnios are normally done somewhere between 18-20 weeks. CVS is much earlier. However, I don''t know of anyone who opted to go that route. My doc just recommeded the screen and then amnio.

What''s everyone''s take on CVS vs amnio? I know the miscarriage chance is a bit higher...

 

[Circe]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:47:57 PM
Author: fisherofmengirly
No, I can't determine what is offensive to one person over another; I've not said I can nor that I would, I simply said my intent was not to offend, and that I wouldn't back down from what abortion is. If people choose to think of it as merely a removal of uterine lining, but to think of a wanted, healthy baby as a baby, that's a rationalization made to make a decision easier.


Values are not something that change with the audience you're with, however. Miriam-Webster defines abortion as: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus. So unless Miriam-Webster is also wrong (as opposed to all the pro-choice sites that merely refer to it as scraping of the uterine lining to terminate a pregnancy), abortion does lead to death, and it's very intent is death.


It's horrible that any baby is ever conceived with any issues at all, and I can't imagine the thoughts and changes having a special needs baby in your home or in your womb could entail. I've not been there, but I can say that I wouldn't opt for an abortion because the outcome of my pregnancy wasn't going to turn out the way I'd dreamed of. Babies should be born healthy and without any pain or cares in the world, for sure. We don't always get exactly what we bargained for. Emotions do run deep on this topic, on both sides. It does seriously puzzle me that people actually would believe that abortion doesn't end in death. I was truly interested when I asked Tgal if she really thought that abortion wasn't a process that leads to death. I wasn't asking a loaded question (or not intending to) nor was my intent to be snarky or talking down to her. I suppose the reason 'kill' has been posted by me so often has been because I don't see a difference between that word and death, and I don't understand why someone would be offended by stating what abortion is. At any rate, if anyone who doesn't think abortion leads to death, I'd be curious to know what it does mean to you, and for anyone I offended by saying 'kill,' I am sorry and can only say that my intent was to hurt no one. There are a lot of women here I really care about and have come to know a lot about (a TTC board will do that for sure) and whom I consider great people and while I know many of them don't adhere to the same values that I do, it's not mattered to the connection that is shared on this forum (not often, anway

) and I don't mean to hurt anyone, but perhaps I have (obviously I have if people have gone to Tgal talking about this thread). Forums are an odd medium where ones words can be read and miscontrued or seen with a tone not intended (which I do remember from the ATW thread and even from threads here on F&H). At the same time, I think everyone's opinions on the topic should be taken into account, and just because someone is in the minority (seemingly, anyway), that should still be something that is able to be posted.


And with that, I will leave my offensive posting (which again had no intent of being offensive) on this thread.

Fisher, I don't think the problem lies in the idea that abortion causes death. I think we can all acknowledge that. I think it lies in the fact that, a) a fetus is not a baby, and that, b) because a fetus is not a baby, the concept of murder (cf. tGal) doesn't exactly apply to it, and c)the image of "killing a baby" and in association with abortion is emotionally loaded and manipulative. The anti-choice movement generally tries to sneak its definition of terms into the language that it uses (see, "pro-life" ... an anti-life movement would either be a tad hypocritical, or its membership would have to be posthumous), and I think this is kind of rubbing a lot of people the same way. It's not "honest" - if anything, it comes across as sneaky and hurtful.

BTW, this might be academic, but your choice of dictionary gives just one possible definition. The OED, generally most trusted of the various dictionaries, dodges prejudicial language and says:
"The expulsion or removal from the womb of a developing embryo or fetus, spec. (Med.) in the period before it is capable of independent survival, occurring as a result either of natural causes (more fully spontaneous abortion) or of a deliberate act (more fully induced abortion); the early or premature termination of pregnancy with loss of the fetus; an instance of this."

ETA: Sorry, NF - looks like we crossposted. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

 

[waxing lyrical]

Date: 7/28/2009 12:31:59 PM
Author: cara
Would I do the amnio? Not sure at my current age but yes if I was older. I think I would want to know in any case but if the odds (of finding something wrong through the amnio) are quite low maybe the amnio-associated miscarriage risk (extremely minimal though it is) wouldn''t be worth it. Currently, I would do the screening test and then evaluate those odds prior to deciding on the amnio. We would terminate for some conditions but are not precisely sure where the line is. No termination for reasonably simple conditions correctable by surgery - cleft palate, certain heart issues - would terminate for certain instantly terminal conditions or near-term terminal conditions with a lot of suffering involved like Tay-Sachs. Not sure where we would be on Down''s syndrome but that is not the scariest condition by any means, even though many Down''s cases are more severe such as waxing''s child. Certain conditions that you can''t test for actually scare me more - like autism. How does one deal with that? Just the financial aspect alone is mindnumbing. Ah, being a parent. Just when I think I am ready, I am reminded you can''t be ready.


The example that got me thinking about when to terminate when I was younger was similar to packrat''s example - it was a fetus with the brain growing outside the skull. No hope of survival outside the womb, since at least as I recall the article even the brain stem was outside the skull. To me, that is a condition I would terminate. The fetus might be living human tissue with a unique genetic combination, but it has no hope of becoming a living, breathing baby. Then the emotional and physical costs to the parent(s) of continuing the pregnancy outweigh (for me) the negligible chance of a positive outcome for the fetus. Of course, like the OP''s example, I can be cold and clinical now but I am sure it would be an immensely heartbreaking experience to go through. And also I am not completely sure of the emotional component and how that would interact with the possible treatment options - maybe for some terminal conditions with less suffering involved I would consider early induction or continuing the pregnancy to be able meet the little one - something I hadn''t really thought about as an option until waxing mentioned it...


OK, final poll question: Of those that wouldn''t terminate no matter what, would you want to know anyway or would you rather be in the dark? This is always an interesting one for me, because there is the Sarah Palin I-want-to-be-prepared camp (with the associated thought that having horrible surprise on your child''s birthday is a bad idea), and the what-will-be-will-be so why worry or test early camp.

Concerning just the conditions screened for? I didn''t have the screening with my others. I did opt for the first trimester screening this time. I went back and forth on that one, but figured why not since I get another chance to see the baby. I''m not big on a lot of interventions or medicalized care. We''ve known since the get-go that our chances go up 1 percent. Not hugely significant. We were prepared regardless of the risk profile. I don''t think I would have started to mentally prepare unless it was a very high risk profile, like 1/13 and below. Since the CVS and amnio were both out of the question we would have relied on the screening and the diagnostic ultrasound and quite possibly a fetal echocardiogram. So, we wouldn''t have been completely in the dark. A positive dx wasn''t really a concern of ours. Just the condition of the baby.

Of the Ds moms I know, many don''t opt for either the screening or amnio. Some just opt for the screening and bypass the amnio. Concerning just Ds since there''s a wide range, a positive dx wouldn''t have told us of his condition. Just a yes or no. For the other trisomies and severe NTDs, there''s really no question of their condition or how it manifests in a particular baby.

When I talked to my husband several months back about fatal conditions, like anencephaly and T13, he expressed he would rather induce labor prematurely, which some usually call induction termination. There are other conditions I''m still nervous about. Conditions that aren''t screened for. Hopefully the diagnostic u/s will show all is okay.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:26:51 PM
Author: Circe


Fisher, I don''t think the problem lies in the idea that abortion causes death. I think we can all acknowledge that. I think it lies in the fact that, a) a fetus is not a baby, and that, b) because a fetus is not a baby, the concept of murder (cf. tGal) doesn''t exactly apply to it, and c)the image of ''killing a baby'' and in association with abortion is emotionally loaded and manipulative. The anti-choice movement generally tries to sneak its definition of terms into the language that it uses (see, ''pro-life'' ... an anti-life movement would either be a tad hypocritical, or its membership would have to be posthumous), and I think this is kind of rubbing a lot of people the same way. It''s not ''honest'' - if anything, it comes across as sneaky and hurtful.

BTW, this might be academic, but your choice of dictionary gives just one possible definition. The OED, generally most trusted of the various dictionaries, dodges prejudicial language and says:
''The expulsion or removal from the womb of a developing embryo or fetus, spec. (Med.) in the period before it is capable of independent survival, occurring as a result either of natural causes (more fully spontaneous abortion) or of a deliberate act (more fully induced abortion); the early or premature termination of pregnancy with loss of the fetus; an instance of this.''

ETA: Sorry, NF - looks like we crossposted. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

LOL, noice. Off to buy an OED...

 

[blushingbride]

Date: 7/28/2009 1:19:28 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/28/2009 1:12:49 PM
Author: NakedFinger

I was the OP, and may I say I by NO means expected this or wanted this to turn into an abortion debate. I was simply asking who has/or who would opt for THIS SPECIFIC test, and if so, how did they/or how do they think they would react. I was just curious to see how many people opt for this test, and do they know their take on it already going into it. My FF and I plan on conceiving shortly after getting married, and are trying to get all the ''big topics'' discussed beforehand. Again, I was just wondering what most women do with THIS TEST (ie: women who are actually pregnant, or will be soon)

So please, political and religious discussions aside. We all have out beliefs and are entitled to them, no need to debate them on a forum especially when I didn''t ask ''what is your take on abortion?''. If you dont like the subject matter (which to remind everyone is an AMNIOCENTESIS TEST), dont post.

Thanks.

That is very wise of you. TGuy and I discussed it as well. We didn''t go into details (i.e., yes for trisomy 18, no for tri 21, etc). We just discussed whether termination would be an issue.

One thing that might be a concern to some is the timing of the amnio. I did mine at 17 weeks - I can''t recall if I felt my baby by then, but it was very close (I think I also felt her at 17-18 weeks). Amnios are normally done somewhere between 18-20 weeks. CVS is much earlier. However, I don''t know of anyone who opted to go that route. My doc just recommeded the screen and then amnio.

What''s everyone''s take on CVS vs amnio? I know the miscarriage chance is a bit higher...

Thanks for this post Tgal (this is the type of stuff I had questions about). For the gal who doesn''t have a baby yet, can you shed some light on what the differences are between CVS and amnio and what both entail? Also, why is it better to have the amnio after 18 weeks?