Need fodde3r

[akashasheiress]

How do I go about arguing with people who are against fetal tests determining things like Down's Syndrome because they feel that this is an attempt at ''eradicating'' people with such conditions? I, personally, think that women who want such prenatal tests should get them, and should be allowed to make their decision from there. However, the people

Comments

[res_urrected]

I agree with everything that's been said here. I got into it on facebook the other day over the "wrongful birth" lawsuit issue. I am disabled and have a disabled daughter, and if anyone knows I know how much more resources it takes to raise and care for children (and, later, possibly adults) with special needs. If the parent or parents are not up for that then they should not be pressured to continue the pregnancy. Neither, then, should they be pressured to end a viable pregnancy because of a disability because disabled lives are NOT automatically lesser than able-bodlied/minded lives. Ultimately, though, a fetus is NOT a person, disabled or no, and the mother should have the right to decide to continue or terminate a pregnancy regardless of her reasoning. When we start restricting choice we also start to take the choice away.

[akashasheiress]

''Ultimately, though, a fetus is NOT a person, disabled or no, and the mother should have the right to decide to continue or terminate a pregnancy regardless of her reasoning. When we start restricting choice we also start to take the choice away.''

This right here is what I've been looking for. Thank you!

[eyelid]

I would go a bit further - it doesn't matter if a fetus is a "person" or not (obviously, lifers will argue that it is.) The woman has the right to decide who uses her body; if she says no, the answer is no, whether the user is a born human or a fetus.

[akashasheiress]

That's a great answer, thank you. I definitely agree that the right solution is working towards both options being equally supported and available.I think the people I'm arguing with and I will never fully agree, though, as they seem to put and inherent value on the fetus itself (yet claim to be ''generally'' pro-choice), as they refer to ''Deciding who gets to live or not'' etc, whereas to me the bodily autonomy of the person carrying it will always reign supreme, no matter the situation. For instance, while sex-selection is generally horrible* the solution is not the banning of pre-natal scanning or abortion based on those grounds. We can never objectively define what is and what is not a ''good enough'' reason for abortion. It's always a matter of the woman's right to choose, regardless of whether that choice is to have or not have a child.

*With the exception of certain genetic diseases that affect one sex exclusively (JMO)

[eyelid]

whereas to me the bodily autonomy of the person carrying it will always reign supreme, no matter the situation.

exactly.

[eyelid]

It's...a difficult one.

huh? how is this the least bit difficult?

The woman wants a test. The doctor is willing to provide it. Exactly how is it anyone else's business, at that point?

I, personally, am more comfortable with 'I don't want a baby' than 'I don't want this baby', but my comfort levels are irrelevant.

lol. over 90% of women abort when they have a Down's diagnosis. But YOU would never do that.

Riiiiight.

this reminds me of the old chestnut, "but _I_ would never have an abortion MYSELF..."

it's up to us to work towards an environment where she can decide without social pressures against disabled people, or practical/ financial pressures about raising a child with a serious medical condition.oh, please. Right, and if only women had infinite financial resources, abortion would disappear