Part 2: what if you found out their diagnosis 1 week after birth
Abortion is fine no matter what, but in particular for this case yes; Down’s syndrome isn’t the almond eyed happy somewhat simple child that Facebook memes make it out to be. They can have awful congenital heart disease, they have a much larger chance of getting leukemia, and they age seemingly twice as fast, a Down’s syndrome person in their forties is incredibly frail. They’re happy enough people and can often enjoy a good quality of life, there’s a guy who is a bartender in Buffalo at a Mexican restaurant who makes amazing drinks, for one, and there’s nothing wrong with having a child with Down’s if you want, but if you find out you are pregnant with a baby with Down’s you really should see medical genetics and have a fetal echo and maternal fetal medicine and ensure you make a decision that works for you. There are Down’s syndrome babies who never leave the hospital because of the comorbidities.
Every time you don’t want to have a kid for whatever reason is ethical to abort.
What’s not ethical is to have a child you don’t really want.
As fucked up as it sounds, if it’s early enough that there isn’t any chance of it being considered alive, I’d let the family decide whether or not to do it on their own because not every family is capable of that type of constant care and/or affording the bill to pay someone to help.
As for a week after birth, as fucked up as it sounds, if you truly cannot afford the constant care, then probably putting them up for adoption to a family that can afford the care is better, IMO, than not being able to afford to care for said child and having potentially seeing them die from lack of care you cannot afford.
Sometimes you need to make hard decisions to keep afloat financially.
I think it’s ethical to abort any baby. It’s parasitic on the host, if you don’t consent to the idea how is it any worse than getting a flu vaccine
If you don’t think you can provide a better life for your kid than state care could I see putting it up for adoption to be ethically mandatory
Doctor wouldn’t know how severe.
Down syndrome is regular DNA but one extra copy that interferes randomly with the building of the body.
Every kid is different.
The doctor told us the fetus might have issues based on growth. We didn’t care.
My son was born with down syndrome. The doctor we had said he may not talk much, may not move much, etc.
He will talk your ear off. He graduated highschool with a modified plan. Got the Phys Ed award in the regular grade 12 program. He reads, writes, excels at video editing and PowerPoint creation, excellent at figuring out technical stuff to a degree. Highly social and works partime.
His birth showed me that acedemics aren’t as important as enjoying life for what it is.
This is wonderful and I’m glad he’s doing so well.
Part 1: Yeet
Part 2: Looks like I’m down with the sickness.
Part 1: GOD YES!!!
Part 2: And thus my long watch has begun.
Yes
This is a decision made by the pregnant person, informed by her/their doctor. I can also see her/their family having some input in informing the pregnant person’s decision, to the extent that they are not being coerced by their family.
As far as outside agents, such as ourselves, are involved, pregnancy is a medical issue. This is the only responsible way for society to handle these questions. Society is able to provide support for parents, esp those who are caretakers of children with severe disabilities, and we can improve education and access to contraceptives. But it is irresponsible and unethical to become involved in the medical decisions of others under any circumstances.
If we really care about unborn children we should care doubly about born children and the families who take on the responsibility of ensuring those disabled individuals are able to experience love and joy. Trying to collapse ethics and morals into pure individual choice is a scam.
I remember discussing this in an undergrad biomedical ethics class. Pls don’t ask us to do ur homework lmao
Jury was still out by the end of class discussion btw. This one was complicated lol
I had business ethics so it was boring questions like “should we advertise to kids” or “do cigarette manufacturers have souls”. But ya this seems to be pretty divisive so far.
Yeah it really splits the crowd. There were three case studies from the course but I can’t find my offering’s outline and I forget the third case study. The first one was: “A woman signs a form saying that if she gets dementia she wants euthanasia in the late/developed stages of the illness. Later, she gets there, but this ‘version’ of her has a really high quality of life and is quite contented. Do you follow through?”
In between there were discussions of frameworks like Aristotelian/Kantian/utilitarian ethics. There were also some medical specific stuff, like the biopsychosocial model of disability. Pretty neat overall, though tbh I wish I took an ethics class more relevant to my current academic pursuits (math)
Every human has an innate right to access Healthcare and this involves prenatal care for expectant mother’s. Mother’s should have access to screenings for a variety of chromosomal issues some of which are literally incompatible with life and the baby will not live more than a few days if at all. Mothers should also have access to post-natal care. Children with disabilities deserve to have access to Healthcare and education.
It is the United States, the UK, France, “israel” and their NATO nazi allies that jave worked to systematically deny most human beings on earth from having access to basic levels of healthcare and education.
Additionally these fascist colonial entities have imposed destruction that causes more children to be born with significant disabilities. Look at what happened to children born in Iraq after the US invasion. What is happening to Children born in Gaza today. I am sure there are many such examples in history.
I met a guy who had cancer twice, he was only 27, his father was exposed to agent orange.
Theres also this artist, RA Rugged Man, who talks about this kind of thing frequently with his work: https://youtu.be/YV2Guv8l2FY
Awful.
I just started reading an article about the horrible diseases caused to children by Agent orange but I had to stop because I was going to throw up.
Death to America
Yes.
What you’re asking about is eugenics. People with downs syndrome can lead rewarding lives. Many people who work with those of us with downs say that they have the highest satisfaction with life of anyone out there. They do require a lot of costly and time consuming care in early life, but there is no reason a child born with downs can’t have a life they find fulfilling.
Given that, I would say if a mother’s only reason for aborting is the downs syndrome, that probably leans towards unethical. However if there are any other reasons a mother might choose to abort that fetus, it’s ethical. But terminating a pregnancy because the child has an “undesirable” trait is both eugenics and ableism which rarely result in ethical decision making.
Even under the umbrella of downs syndrome being the only reason, I think there’s variability. “I won’t be able to take care of this child” is quite different from “This child has an undesirable trait.”
Is it ethical to abort a child with any kind of disease/syndrome that requires more resources, time, and money than the parents can afford? If we had rephrased it as an adoption, it would be inarguable child abuse for a couple to adopt a special needs child they have no capability of raising.
I don’t disagree with you. Unwanted children do not have happy outcomes, especially those with disabilities. However if you are applying the logic of adoption to that of eugenics you should tread carefully. If society is allowed to impose restrictions on adoptions, why not biological parents? Perhaps pregnant women should have an income test? If a mother can’t afford to feed her child should she be allowed to retain custody or have the baby at all?
If a pregnant person decides they cannot afford it or aren’t up for the commitment that’s ethical. If a pregnant person decided to abort out of some pity for people with downs, well that’s eugenics and ableist, so probably unethical. Pragmatically though the result is the same.
Personally I interpreted the question as an individuals dilemma, I never intended for it to be a societal, or government sweeping legislation or expectation to abort any fetus with disabilities, just whether or not it was ethical for an individuals decision to abort. I dont think government or law should exist at all, so I wouldnt support any government restrictions on reproductive rights
It’s not ethical to not abort the pregnancy in this case. There is nothing wrong with getting rid of the fetus, there is everything wrong with letting a person disabled to this stage from the start emerge.
About part 2: I think euthanasia is ethical in this case. Certainly more ethical than emotional blackmail with “unborn child”.
Part 1: yes, abort
Pat 2: you’d have to be blind to not see that your child has down syndrome for a week. Not much you can do at this point outside of putting the child in the system to be abused and abandoned or murdering it so this is the point where I become stuck with a mentally challenged child.
