A World Without Downs Syndrome

I believe that she is a devout Christian and would probably not have a termination. I'm only going by things I've read in the past and could be wrong however. I haven't seen the programme yet so can't comment on it, but it seems wrong that someone who has a lifestyle that can afford to give her son everything he needs to fulfil his potential (and he does seem to be an adorable lad) and doesn't have to worry about him when she is no longer around, shouldn't make others( eg single parents etc) feel bad about having a termination. However, that probably isn't what the programme was about, so I should watch it before making a comment, I guess.

I watched the programme ,one of my cousins was a downs baby who lived untill he was fifty three. It was so hard for his parents because he was born in the forties.

He was adored by us all, when he died his parents were distraught , my Aunt said the difficult times were nothing compared to the love and laughter he brought into their lives.

I agreed with Sally Phillips .

to abort a child who has so much love and no anger, hate, greed, bitterness is destroying a life because they are different !

There are a couple of children with Downs Syndrome at the school where I volunteer. They are a delight.

The Moral Maze on Radio 4 last night at 8 o clock addressed this too.
We have a 37year old cousin (well daughter of DH's cousin) who has Down's and she is a delight, BUT I would be slow to point the finger at any pregnant woman who chose not to proceed with her pregnancy. It is as heartbreaking a decision as it is a diagnosis. And as yet I do not know whether the tests which can be run are a true indicator of the other complications. There are such varied degrees of disability and health issues connected with Down's Syndrome. Anniebach, I think that you, with the best possible intentions, may be guilty of oversimplification.
I still see elderly parents with an adult child who has Down's and I wonder, as perhaps they do, who will look after their "child" when they are gone.
Our cousin (late 70's) lost her son ,who died suddenly in his mid 20's but who we always assumed that would be able to be responsible for his younger sister's welfare, finances, accommodation etc when his mother has gone. The father died of a stroke just 1 year after his son.
Not an easy subject and certainly no absolutes regarding "right" or "wrong".

I think it's the thin end of the wedge that she's really worred about.How many other conditions are going to be considered undesirable in the future. I was once involved in a gymnastics competition for the Special Olympics. Many of the competitors had Downs and some had been born with other problems, but there were some who had been in catastrophic accidents which had left them with very limited mental and physical abilities. Will we reach a point when they are considered too damaged for a perfect society. It's an awful cliche but it was an experience I wouldn't have missed.

It's not possible to generalise about people with Downs Syndrome. People with the condition can be greedy, angry etc just as the rest of us can. Also they often have allied physical problems which can be life limiting. Some people with Downs are very able, others are not and will need constant care. It's a very personal and difficult decision for parents I think.

So long as people have a free choice about whether to have the screening (or whether to know the result) and whether to terminate or not, depending on the result of the screening, I don't see that there should be a problem.

They are not all delightful and a joy some have so many problems, both health and social that their families, especially parents have a very hard life. Neighbours of ours have a son who is now nearly forty. They worry about his future as they do not want their S and D to be responsible for him. They know how their own lives have been affected for forty years. This doesn't answer the debate, I am pointing out how families are affected long term.

It was a very good programme, very interesting
I think it's pretty awful to think that they would wipe out Downs what next ? Cerebral Palsy Autism, Asperger, anyone with a low IQ, that's sounding a bit like making the perfect race which rings some bells. I can certainly see the value in wiping out genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis sickle cell etc but Downs isnt an illness

I thought it was very telling that Iceland now has virtually no per cent Downs after offering the test, 100% women aborted which kind of answers your post Thatbags

Whilst there can be big problems with any children or young people born with health problems surely they are still entitled to live and most people with a Downs child seem to be showered in fun and love that help to offset the difficulties

My cousin in law is now 65 and after being told he wouldn't have much life through a bad heart and dislocated hips as well as Downs he is still going strong working in his little community workshop

Do you think Icelandic women did not have a free choice, bluebelle? That they were forced to have terminations?

I don't.

So no child born who isn't a downs will have life limiting problems?

The greed I spoke if was the greed for bigger and better and more money.

Yes free choice for the woman, what of the child's right to life ?

No I am not oversimplification, if I am guilty of being against the desire for perfection I am comfortable with such guilt , in fact I feel no guilt

Well said Bluebell , we are speaking of human life not faulty goods from a factory

Most of these posts refer to having a Downs child. Children, like puppies and kittens, grow up into adults, and may outlive their loving parents. It must be a great worry to think that your child is likely to need care when you have gone.

Yes Elegran , I am speaking of downs children and their right to life

I know that, Anniebach I was saying that Downs children grow up into Downs adults.

I take the point Elegran. The attraction of a jolly smiling child is a bit different from a spotty teenager awash in hormones. But, Downs or not, this is what happens to everyone.

I thought the programme was very interesting, but I think Sally is a better comic actor than a documentary maker.

The lady who had had the termination was a bit chilling I felt - her description of how the pregnancy was ended was harrowing.

I have no religion, so that is not what influences my thinking, but I am very disturbed by termination in general; and I feel it should only be available in the most extreme of circumstances. Maybe it is possible to have too much choice?

No i dont for a moment think Iclandic women were forced Thatbags but its very rare to get 100percent of anything so there must have been some reason no woman stepped up and kept their child Was it how the test was operated, the words used, was there some carrot and stick used. I have NO idea I just cant believe every woman thought that they wanted to kill their baby sooner than have one that was considered 'imperfect'

Of course children grow in to adults Elegan I have already spoken about my 65 year old Downs cousin My neighbours son is 23 and she would never be without him he has caused many health worries and fears over the years but hes adored by is family. hes much loved in the community and she is worried by that program

What do you think of a child born with another major health problem that will need looking after for life do we kill them as well or is only Downs on the 'get rid of' list

Why does everyone expect an easy ride through life with perfect children Very few people get away with no problems as parents and grandparents, with no worries about out kids as we age. Look at the threads on here you dont have to have Downs to cause your family worries, fears, heartache and blooming hard work

Playing God comes to mind and I ll ask the same question Why Downs why not any other genetic or long term health problem that can be discovered in the womb

bluebelle I may be wrong, but I think that termination is offered to mothers carryingsome other genetic conditions. The choice is a heart-breaking one, whatever the condition.

I wasn't advocating that parents are urged to have terminations, I was just pointing out that there are many threads on here describing the loving and lovable Downs children (add in non-Downs children with serious handicaps if you wish) in their happy families, but none describing less adorable adults in unsupported and less happy situations.

I didn't watch the programme but I read Sally Philips' long article in last Saturday's Weekend Guardian.

I think it should be entirely up to the parents as to whether they proceed with such a pregnancy. Not everybody feels able to take on the responsibility of caring for a special needs child and some Downs Sydrome children have quite severe learning difficulties and significant health issues.

Sally Phillips lives in a house with a "large garden" in south west London and I can't recall what her husband's job was reported to be, but it was a senior, professional job which no doubt is pretty well paid. Sally, as a well known actress, is probably quite well paid herself. Presumably they can afford to get additional support if they need it.

What about families, perhaps with other young children, where both parents work in only moderately paid and inflexible jobs. It is much harder for people with limited means to cope with the additional pressure of a child who will require much more attention and guidance and who is unlikely to be fully independent even after reaching adulthood.

In my opinion, it is a good thing that mothers can find out early in the pregnancy if they are carrying a Downs Sydrome child and make a decision as to whether they wish to continue with the pregnancy, rather than having to make such an agonising decision much later in the pregnancy.

I don't think parents should be pressured one way or the other as to what they should do. There will always be parents who will wish to continue with the pregnancy and I think they should be given every support possible - unfortunately that is not often very much.

I think it must be a most terrible dilemma for a parent and I don't believe that anyone should be accused of being "selfish"for having a Downs baby (as Richard Dawkins suggested a while back) or "greedy" for deciding not to.

My husband worked with people with learning disabilities, some of them with Downs. They were not all happy and gentle and easy-going. Like anyone else, they could at times be quite grumpy and difficult to cope with. When their parents got old or ill it could become difficult if a fully grown man in a temper started to throw his weight around. This was often when residential care became the only practical option. At that time the homes in which they lived were lovely - comfortable and homely, with big kitchens and home-cooked, nutritious food, regular parties and socials. A few years down the line, with the Council hit by cuts in government subsidies in this deprived area, one of the best of these homes was closed and the land sold by the council to make way for private flats. The residents were shipped out, separated from their special friends and the staff they trusted, and moved to a variety of other housing provisions. That is the reality of it for many people.

When I was working I came across several children with Downs, of different levels of ability. After I retired I had part time work with 2 children with Downs - one, a boy quite bright, I was teaching him reading. The other, a girl, had multiple physical problems, couldn't communicate verbally. I loved both of them, the boy especially had a great sense of humour, but was also very stubborn. The girl could be difficult too.
I certainly wouldn't want to be a parent faced with the termination decision.
Another point is, they can often be born to older parents who are themselves physically less able to cope. The parents of the 2 children I worked with were in early middle age.

Maybe those women who already knew they wouldn't want a termination whatever the result of the screening, weren't included in the 100%, blueb. Maybe they never even had the screening. I refused amniocentesis when I was pregnant with DD1 (don't know why it was offered, actually; it was rather a pushy registrar). My attitude was that I'd cope. Twenty years later when pregnant with DD3 I did have an amniocentesis test. Fortunately all was well because I wasn't sure of coping with "whatever" by then.

What I'm saying is that it may just be that 100% of the women who had the Downs screening and in whose foetuses the Downs genetic abnormality was discovered, also had terminations.

No one would want to be faced with that decision but some are, what troubles me is all the caring seems to be for the parents not the child who doesn't have a choice of life or death.

Neither do the ones that abort naturally, as 50% of my pregnancies did. Nobody complains about their lack of choice.

And I don't complain about lack of choice for the still births of two of my children, there was no choice . We are discussing decisions to abort are we not?