Searching for Perfection=more abortions

[Dreadsox]

I am not certain about common sense prevailing.

What is the name of the book?

 

[kobayashi]

the book is the future of human nature

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Another book which is somewhat related to this is Francis Fukuyama's Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. I definitely don't agree with every word, but it's certainly an interesting read.

 

[Salome]

If people are going to abort for one defect, with the development of future technology, they may decide that there are other "defects" that are potential "hardships" on the family.

if society would develop into something where people would start thinking like this then when they are trying to have children then I'm 98% sure that technology isnt the problem but the human race is

 

[anitram]

Agree with Salome - it's silly to blame the technology.

Also, Dread, you need to be more specific wrt defect. Are you referring to a genetic defect, because in that case, it is a very easy definition to make. There are several ways you can be genetically deficient (I know, because I have one diagnosed genetic disorder and another very rare genetic disorder is suspected, but I'm not getting my test results back for 4 more weeks). For a genetic disorder, you have to have either a mutation in the coding portion of your DNA which will give rise to a defective gene product (ie. a protein). The defect can either be functional (ie. the protein doesn't work) or expressive (it is not expressed at appropriate levels) or immunodeficient (inability of self-antibodies to undergo negative selection). This is my field and I can go on and on about it, LOL.

Because I work in the research institute of one of the top 3 pediatric hospitals in the world, I can tell you that there are many genetic disorders so severe that the child is essentially born to die. They will never speak, never develop thinking skills and die in agony in the first months or years of life. I would not pass judgment on parents, because while a cleft pallate is not the end of the world, there are disorders which are. There are also disorders which seriously endanger the life of the mother and in that case, I can place no blame on her choosing an abortion. Where do you draw the line? Let the individual make the choice for themselves. If a person can have an abortion because they can't financially afford a child, or because they don't want a biracial child, or because they don't want a 4th child, or because they are homeless, then how is this any different? If you want to bring a child into this world who will die in 2 weeks, then that is up to you, just like it's up to someone else not to do so.

 

[Liesje]

I will admit that my opinion here is extremely bias because I don't believe in ANY form of abortion for any reason. I think when a couple decides to have a child, part of that decision is also accepting the risk that the child might have some physical or mental defect. Yeah, it sucks, but that's how life works. Nothing is 100% guaranteed and you have to consider that. I serisously cannot fathom wanting to become a mother and then wanting to kill the fetus because it would be handicapped. If couples are so self-centered that they can't love a child with a handicap, then why don't they just adopt? There are so many unwanted and orphaned children in this world that need help. Why not go to an orphanage and pick exactly what you want if it's just a big issue to have a boy vs. a girl, or a kid that's a certain size or color or IQ....

 

[Dreadsox]

If a cleft pallett is considered a defect......

then what is to stop someone from defining ADD or ADHD or Bi-polar disorder as a defect?

I do not need to be specific. That is why I said "defect" in quotes.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

If couples are so self-centered that they can't love a child with a handicap, then why don't they just adopt?

I think that to assume that such a decision would be due to the couple being "self-centered" is far too simplistic. There are so many factors which could influence a couple's decision if they were in this situation. I also think that deciding to have an abortion is an agonising decision for a couple to have to make and I don't believe that deciding to abort a fetus which would be born with severe disabilities indicates that the parents wouldn't have loved the child.

 

[BluberryPoptart]

And no, cleft palates are a ludicrous reason for aborting an unborn child.

I completely agree. But it's not as ludicrous as eliminating the child because you "aren't ready" or "can't afford it yet" or "my boyfriend is mad."


As you can probably tell by that post, I am very opposed to abortion for selfish and convenience reasons or using it for birth control. I'm torn on the Down's Syndrome though. A lot of those kids suffer, have health problems and are an emotional as well as financial burden on their families. I do know families who have them and call the "special" and love them and consider them a blessing. Then you have the types who will dump them in a state orphanage at taxpayer expense because they can't deal with it. So even though I am mainly anti- abortion I can understand that to some extent, though I can't really condone it. But I understand, Dreadsox, what you mean at where do you draw the line? What will be 'good' and 'wrong' reasons to have the child killed? You can't leave it up to morals and conscience, just as you can't do that with any law. It is upsetting. It's hard. If you want to get really extreme, I know a woman who believes all 'imperfect' children should be euthanized at birth because they are a burden on society and the school systems.

 

[meegannie]

I think that to assume that such a decision would be due to the couple being "self-centered" is far too simplistic. There are so many factors which could influence a couple's decision if they were in this situation. I also think that deciding to have an abortion is an agonising decision for a couple to have to make and I don't believe that deciding to abort a fetus which would be born with severe disabilities indicates that the parents wouldn't have loved the child.

 

[beli]

It can mean whatever. That's the beauty of "choice." They may never look back, or they may be tortured by it until they die and beyond. But that is their choice, and it is not my place to judge.

Melon

Kewl. Thats what I was hoping you ment.

 

[bonosloveslave]

I agree with you Dread - another example of a 'slippery slope'. But then again I am sick about all the perfectly healthy babies that are thrown away as well.

 

[anitram]

I do not need to be specific. That is why I said "defect" in quotes.

Maybe you don't need to be, but the scientific community is quite specific in defining genetic defects.

 

[Screaming Flower]

Again, the mothers will have to deal with their conscience someday.

 

[Dreadsox]

Maybe you don't need to be, but the scientific community is quite specific in defining genetic defects.

I think you are looking at it from a scientific standpoint, however, if people are beginning to look at things like clubbed feet, or cleft pallates....there is something wrong and I see nothing that could stop science from develping future tests to determine other "defects" that people may not want in their lives.

I am not saying this to insult anyone who may have dealt with this very personal issue. I am looking at it as a misuse of future technology to seek the "perfect child".

 

[beli]

I think you are looking at it from a scientific standpoint, however, if people are beginning to look at things like clubbed feet, or cleft pallates....there is something wrong and I see nothing that could stop science from develping future tests to determine other "defects" that people may not want in their lives.

And maybe science can find a way of curing these disabilities while the child is still in the womb.

Then wouldnt that be a wonderful world to live in

 

[anitram]

"Science" is an idea, therefore it does not develop anything on its own; people do.

I can't get into too many details, because I am working on something that we may want to patent, but I work on cancer research (breast to be exact), and we are trying to develop blockers, because some women have a particular type of mutation which makes tamoxifen essentially useless. There are labs all around us, doing all sorts of different things. So what are we talking about here? Stopping technological advances which some people deem to potentially lead to immoral things? Stem cells, now DNA sequencing in utero...The same question can be posed therefore - where do you stop?

 

[beli]

I process clinical trial and other medical insurance applications. I enjoy reading the applications and thinking "I hope this one works, its sounds wonderful".

I honestly believe, and maybe Im naive, that society will put brakes on itself if we start heading down a foggy path. I really dont believe that society will begin making/choosing babies that only fit the USA ideal of beauty or whatever.

 

[anitram]

I process clinical trial and other medical insurance applications. I enjoy reading the applications and thinking "I hope this one works, its sounds wonderful".

I honestly believe, and maybe Im naive, that society will put brakes on itself if we start heading down a foggy path. I really dont believe that society will begin making/choosing babies that only fit the USA ideal of beauty or whatever.

I totally agree with you. There is such a rush when you're on the brink of a new discovery.

IMO, a lot of the problem also has to do with the fact that oftentimes the loudest opponents of specific scientific discovery are people who would not pass Biology 101 at a community college. That is not to say all, but believe me, I've had discussions with people about cloning which are so ridiculous that they do not bear repeating. I routinely clone (subclone) things on a weekly basis. I just successfully cloned a bidirectional signalling receptor into a cancer cell line. But you say cloning and people turn into paranoid masses imagining Hitler babies. It blows the mind, and just goes to show that probably 90% of the general population has no idea what cloning even means.

 

[beli]

It blows the mind, and just goes to show that probably 90% of the general population has no idea what cloning even means.

I think theres a lot of hysteria involved. I processed genetic manipulation applications for years and the things we used to do to keep it all secret. Okay, sometimes there was a commerical value in the work and good reason to 'hide' it from the community. But we have had vehicles vandalised etc when some individuals have worked out what is going on.

I had to sink our entire GMO section of the web to a restricted access web site. This includes just the application forms that are required to be completed by federal legislation.

I guess Im an individual who admires the work of researchers and believes that tomorrow will be a better place than today. And there are so many wonderous things in store for us.

There will always be the unethical doctor, the village idiot with the gun, the cult with the ricin. But I dont believe society should be slowed down by these people.

PS Anitram, congratulations and keep up the good work.

 

[Liesje]

I also think that deciding to have an abortion is an agonising decision for a couple to have to make and I don't believe that deciding to abort a fetus which would be born with severe disabilities indicates that the parents wouldn't have loved the child.

This is something couples need to consider before getting pregnant. My opinion is that if you're not willing to or prepared to care for your child no matter what, then you should not get pregnant.

 

[U2Kitten]

This is something couples need to consider before getting pregnant. My opinion is that if you're not willing to or prepared to care for your child no matter what, then you should not get pregnant.

You know we may not agree on much but I'm with you on this one.

 

[Liesje]

You know we may not agree on much but I'm with you on this one.

hehe!

The way I see, what could ever be more important/significant that raising a child? So when a couple makes the decision to have a child, they should consider EVERY possibility. If they're not willing to accept a child with health risks or a handicap, then play it safe and adopt a child. I don't think there's anything less significant about this form of parenthood. This is what I plan to do at least once. It makes perfect sense to me. I know a family who has a child with cystic fibrosis which is genetic, so they had to adopt the rest of their children because they didn't want another child with the disease. Aborting a child b/c it has a cleff palette just seems so sick and twisted and, I think, selfish.

There's just something that feels so wrong about playing God. You can preach women's rights at me all day long, but as a woman, I feel that an unborn child should NEVER EVER have to suffer b/c someone else decides it is not worthy of living or someone else doesn't have the guts to live with their mistake. If a couple really can't deal with a handicap child, there are lots of families that adopt special needs children. EVERY child has a right to live and be loved.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

This is something couples need to consider before getting pregnant. My opinion is that if you're not willing to or prepared to care for your child no matter what, then you should not get pregnant.

Let's use a hypothetical situation here: a couple finds out that their child will be born with such severe disabilities that it will live for only a few months or years, will have no quality of life and will suffer unimaginably throughout its entire life. In your opinion if they choose to have an abortion, then they shouldn't have got pregnant in the first place?

That seems so judgemental to me. I can't imagine what a couple must go through if they find out their child will be born with severe disabilities, but I don't believe that deciding to have an abortion is a decision they take lightly and I certainly don't accept that making that decision means that they shouldn't have decided to have children in the first place.

 

[U2Kitten]

Aborting a child b/c it has a cleff palette just seems so sick and twisted and, I think, selfish.

Especially since they are so easily repaired by surgery these days and it's not life threatening. I would extend the 'sick and twisted' and 'selfish' thing further than that on this issue, but I don't feel like fighting

There's just something that feels so wrong about playing God. You can preach women's rights at me all day long, but as a woman, I feel that an unborn child should NEVER EVER have to suffer b/c someone else decides it is not worthy of living or someone else doesn't have the guts to live with their mistake.

That's the entire abortion issue in a nutshell to me

 

[meegannie]

Let's use a hypothetical situation here: a couple finds out that their child will be born with such severe disabilities that it will live for only a few months or years, will have no quality of life and will suffer unimaginably throughout its entire life. In your opinion if they choose to have an abortion, then they shouldn't have got pregnant in the first place?

That seems so judgemental to me. I can't imagine what a couple must go through if they find out their child will be born with severe disabilities, but I don't believe that deciding to have an abortion is a decision they take lightly and I certainly don't accept that making that decision means that they shouldn't have decided to have children in the first place.

I think it's very judgemental and harsh to declare the decision to have an abortion 'selfish' in all cases. The cleft palate-type cases are EXTREMELY rare, and I don't think anyone here thinks a child should be aborted because of a relatively minor deformity. It's probably much easier to discuss the (remote) possibilty of having a child who has a rare and/or severe disorder or disability than to deal with the reality of the situaton. I personally can't imagine what it would be like to know that my child would live for a few years at the most, enduring treatment after treatment, and that their entire short life they would be in intense pain. I've always said that I would never, under any circumstances, have an abortion, but I don't know for a fact how I would react if I were in that situation.

What constitutes 'playing God'? Artificial insemination? Fertility treatments? Organ transplants? Euthanasia? The death penalty? Where do you draw the line?

 

[U2Kitten]

I think it's very judgemental and harsh to declare the decision to have an abortion 'selfish' in all cases.

I'm not talking about all cases. I'm not talking about severe deformities that would cause the child to suffer and die anyway. But using the old worst case scenario thing to justify every single one doesn't fly with me, because statistics have shown that over 90% (in some reports as high as 98%) of the abortions in the US had nothing to do with rape, incest, threat to the mother's life or the health of the baby.

 

[Angela Harlem]

I think LivLuv was only referring to the cleft palate example.

I do want to ask how exactly you mean parents should consider all possibilities. I think many go through the "Dear, what would you think if we had a baby with XYZ" conversations, and once pregnant it is unbelievable the number of worries you can develop. It's easy enough to find out what is wrong after the fact, but hardly anyone would ever not try for a child naturally themselves from fear of the slim odds of having a major defect. Blood tests can determine once you are pregnant the likelihood of having a Downs baby, and an ultrasound at I think 22 weeks will show the neck test, as well as an amnio, but the deal I have with what you say is most people end up at that point before giving it the thought it requires. And is that bad? When (I guess I am normal so I will use me as an example) I only have a 1 in 14,000+ chance of having a Downs baby? I really dont know what I'd do if faced with it, but if I am honest, I would say I would never use such slim odds to put me off ever having or trying for another baby.

Human nature looks at odds and says "It'll be alright, lets try and worry when/if we need to".

 

[meegannie]

I'm not talking about all cases. I'm not talking about severe deformities that would cause the child to suffer and die anyway. But using the old worst case scenario thing to justify every single one doesn't fly with me, because statistics have shown that over 90% (in some reports as high as 98%) of the abortions in the US had nothing to do with rape, incest, threat to the mother's life or the health of the baby.

Right. I agree with that.

 

[Klaus]

I read this thread and thought about posting several times but all i can say is that i'm glad i was never in such a situation to make such a difficult decision.
And more than that (and i think it's unfair) in my country i never will have to make such a decision because the women has almost all rights to decide how she wants, because it would be HER baby, not ours until it's born.