I doubt whether there will ever be discovered a “gay” or autism genetic marker because these conditions exist on a spectrum…it is not a binary issue like Down Syndrome, i.e., you either have it or you don’t.
No one is 100% gay or autistic, there is wide variability in the behaviors demonstrated.
Will they be able to assess for biological “risk” factors, perhaps. There are other more obvious epidemiological factors associated with autistic spectrum, such as family history. For example, if the father has ASD, there is a far increased chance for the child to have the disorder.
People choose to have abortions for a multitude of reasons, they always have. Some may be forgivable, some not, depending on your point of view.
I agree. But I have seen the other equally disturbing side, seeing what many could NOT do and would NEVER do. That is where my conflicted emotions and thinking came from. When there is existence, but no “life” and no chance ever at “life” would it not be kinder to not prolong that existence?
We put down our pets or work animals when they reach a point when they have no more “life” and we consider that a kindness?
Why do we treat our animals with greater kindness than our people?
There is also, which I had not mentioned earlier, my religious upbringing and my current beliefs and faiths in God and doubts, that all lead to even greater conflicted thinking.
In spite of the prevalence and encouraging of this test on all pregnant women, it is strictly a screening that may indicate a “need” for more, some of it, invasive testing. Yikes!
Some pregnant women have elevated levels of HCG (evaluated in more recent versions of the test) because they are pregnant with more than one. Babies who actually have a neural tube defect, such as spina bifida, or chromosomal defect like Downs, are in the minority of births.
It’s rather creepy the amount of encouragement that is going into testing for problems that only affect a small percentage of the population. And elimination of any group, no matter how small a percentage of the population, should be setting off bells and whistles.
…”seeing what many could NOT and would NEVER do…”
From anti death penalty to abortion rights, sometimes I wonder if I’m wrong. I remember reading of a Texas woman who, I believe successfully sued stating she wasn’t given full information to make an informed decision regarding pregnancy.
The problem wasn’t Downs Syndrome, but the woman’s contracting rubella during pregnancy. Rubella testing became part of MMR around 1971. The baby, a girl, was born in 1969.
This woman must be able to provide while alive and post mortem for an adult daughter who is totally helpless. She wasn’t given information about the full effects of rubella on an unborn, where, at that time, she might have been able to choose a medical abortion, so, IMO, her grounds for suing her obstetrician were correct.
As someone who leans towards life, from the womb to the tomb, I also feel zero tolerance = zero brainpower. There have always been and should be room for exceptions.
There are no bright lines, no black and white, but only endless shades of grey on this issue.
Some in my family (mother’s side) carry the gene for a lethal allele. The gene, if active causes a massive heart deformity that is 100% fatal. Death usually occurs in the final month of gestation, but occasional as a stillbirth and sometimes the fetus survives the birth and lives for a day or so.
Fortunately, this can now be screened for very early on and the pregnancy can be terminated. In this case, you are merely speeding up what is bound to happen anyway and sparing the mother the anguish (and danger) of a term pregnancy only to lose the child at or near birth.
In the case of lethal alleles, screening out these pregnancies is justified, particularly as the fetus is already, by definition, doomed.
Same with Tay Sachs disease, largely present in Ashkenazi Jewish populations as well as French Canadian. Babies who receive a gene from both parents for this die early in childhood.
I’m perplexed by intentionally targeting babies with Downs Syndrome, though. This isn’t a new disorder.
It is survivable, with an average of 60 being lived by many since they are no longer cared for in institutions. There are support systems for such families, including through this lady
who also has offices in other parts of the U S, home base being California.
In regards to Iceland and Down’s Syndrome my assumption was that perhaps it was a cultural rather than state issue - the government doesn’t mandate abortions for it, doesn’t even mandate testing for it in the first place. So why are Icelanders choosing to have abortions after positive tests?
What little googling I did showed that DS is not, in fact, nearly eradicated in Iceland - actually it’s only 10% less than in other European countries. Iceland has a higher rate of abortion in general than other Nordic countries, a fact attributed in part to limited sex education there as well as less effective use of contraception.
Prenatal testing for DS exists nearly everywhere in first world countries, but Icelandic women abort after a positive test nearly 100% of the time - why? Some sources say it’s the result of heavy handed genetic counseling, if that’s true easy to assume there’s a state influence at play. So yeah, still not sure myself without further reading.
(For the record? In the US a positive test for DS results in abortion 67% of the time. The rates are much higher in European nations.)
There is nothing inherently noble about being forced to bring a life into this world that will be brief, painful, and filled with complications for both the child and it’s family. Nobody is saying that people with Down’s Syndrome are bad or should be treated in any way like lesser human beings, but the reality is that their condition often requires a lifetime of care that prevents true independence. A family has every right to be made fully aware of that and to make the decision as to if they want that to be their future or not.
I’m not sure, Lou. We have to be stewards of our pets as they are helpless. If they were in the wild no doubt when any weakness or sickness hit them, they’'d be left behind or killed by another animal.
As people, we have means of communicating and asking for help and medical technology that allows us vast improvements in our ailments or infirmities.
