Part 2: what if you found out their diagnosis 1 week after birth

  • BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    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.

  • holy_scroller@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    I don’t know about the ethics, but forcing people to carry to term a baby with a significant developmental disability is unconscionable to me. It is very likely to ruin their marriage, finances, sanity, life, but the people that manage to do it are saints.

  • Eczpurt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Can’t really say for part 1 but for part 2 it’s definitely not abortion anymore after birth so that is unethical in my opinion.

  • BottleBoardBakon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    It’s kinda besides the point. If a woman wants an abortion she should get an abortion. Downs syndrome or not, it doesn’t matter.

    • TheReanuKeeves@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      I don’t mean in a her body her choice kinda way, I mean is it more ethical to let them live their natural life knowing that they would possibly suffer immensely vs not letting them live a life at all

      • Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 days ago

        So you’re asking should all prior with special needs be terminated so they don’t suffer? Should all poor people?

        Kinda slippery slope there tbh…

        I think that anyone who isn’t ready to be a parent should have that option not to. Special needs or not. Forced birth and zero support after is terrible.

  • Melobol@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    It is ethical to abort in the first part of the pregnancy. If tge fetus has a chance of disability or mental disorder.
    No one is ready to take care of a disabled person instead of a healthy child.
    It is ethical to give the child up for adoption (now tge adopter should be ready for the same problem).
    Also it is also ethical to keep it.

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    If it’s ethical to abort just because you don’t want the kid (and it is), then it’s ethical to abort for any reason.

    Also, it’s no one’s business why people choose to abort.

    • TheReanuKeeves@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      I mean more like “is a life of suffering worth living and would a parent want that for their kid” rather than the ethics of abortion

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      it’s no one’s business why people choose to abort.

      This. The only answer to “why” is “fuck off”, and for so many reasons. It’d suck to agonize over the decision, and once it’s made to then be second-guessed by some rando.

  • Brokkr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    Would it be ethical to knowingly give someone a 99% chance of a severe illness within a few months?

  • katy ✨@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 days ago

    all children require constant care of you’re not willing to so that with people with disabilities then you’re just a eugenic

    im not making a bullshit anti choice take btw

  • BCsven@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    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.

  • marcie (she/her)@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    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

  • beliquititious@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    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.

    • JakenVeina@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      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.”

    • weeeeum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      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.

      • beliquititious@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 days ago

        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.

        • weeeeum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 days ago

          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

  • Faux@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    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”.