Do you find abortion due to the child´s disability offensive

Page 2 of 6 [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

13 Feb 2013, 7:50 pm

I don't have a problem with any abortion that is done with the woman's consent.



hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

13 Feb 2013, 7:52 pm

puddingmouse wrote:
I don't have a problem with any abortion that is done with the woman's consent.

i agree with this.


_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105


blunnet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,053

13 Feb 2013, 7:59 pm

Quote:
Do you find abortion due to the child´s disability offensive

No, I find it merciful instead.



Dragoness
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 375

13 Feb 2013, 10:30 pm

hyperlexian wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
I don't have a problem with any abortion that is done with the woman's consent.

i agree with this.


For the most part, in terms of normal pregnancies, I agree with you. However, if the woman wants to have an abortion, say, at eight months, than I feel uncomfortable with that. It's the woman's choice, and if the woman wants to that, she can, but I don't think it should be done at a very late stage in the pregnancy.

thomas81 wrote:
depends on the nature of the disability. In many cases, the difficulties caused by the disability or illness would invariably render the quality of life so low that abortion might be kinder in the long run. Things like extreme deformities, where conjoined twins share a single heart or even a single brain for example.


Now I'll actually talk about the subject of the thread. I completely agree with the above statement.



Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

13 Feb 2013, 10:34 pm

Yes.

Basing worth on ability is morally and ethically wrong.

Other than that, abort away. Too many people on this planet as is.

(Pretty cool how those two statements conflict with one another. :P)



Tensu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,661
Location: Nixa, MO, USA

13 Feb 2013, 10:51 pm

Jacoby wrote:
I find abortion offensive for any other reason besides rape or life of the mother.


/seconded.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

13 Feb 2013, 10:58 pm

I agree with ruveyn's point of view.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

13 Feb 2013, 11:02 pm

Hopetobe wrote:
I can´t help myself, I see prenatal diagnostic and abortion due to the child´s disbility as fascistic eugenics.
By child you mean fetus.


_________________
.


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

13 Feb 2013, 11:11 pm

In theory I don't approve of abortion.
If the situation is severe enough to warrant it then maybe.
It's kind of a slippery slope, though...


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

14 Feb 2013, 4:22 am

No one but the parents, particularly the pregnant woman, have the right to parse the parents' particular circumstances as they relate to the potential issues of the fetus she carries.



Mummy_of_Peanut
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,564
Location: Bonnie Scotland

14 Feb 2013, 8:07 am

ruveyn wrote:
thomas81 wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
That depends on the disability. If the disability is such that the child cannot live a human life, then termination is the best option. If the disability is such that it merely inconveniences the parents, that is a different matter.

ruveyn

in this case, 'human' is something of a weasel word. Take a person with extreme kanner's autism for example. Many people would say they are incapable of living a 'human' life in the conventional sense but it doesnt mean they couldnt live in a different way that is meaningful to them. I would hate for a baby to be terminated on these grounds alone.

If the disability is going to cause long term extreme suffering that cannot be outgrown, rectified or treated, that is the time to consider abortion on these grounds.


I agree with your reservations. What I had in mind was a condition like spina biffida or acephelia which is being born with a brain missing the cerebral cortex. With the latter there is no hope of a human existence in any sensible meaning of the word.

I also concur with your reservation concerning suffering. We put down our beloved pets when the pain gets too great. We should do the same for people if they so desire or the parents of a suffering infant so require.

ruveyn
I think possibly the condition you were thinking of is 'anencephaly', which is a neural tube spectrum condition, just as spina bifida is, but it means that a significant part of the brain/skull is missing. Usually, the baby dies within a few days, but I did see a programme where the Mum was praying for a miracle and had her child on life support for many years. Of course, there was no hope of a recovery and I don't know what the situation is with the child now. Acephaly means that the foetus has no head and this is very rare. As for spina bifida, there's a gradient of severity. Some people have no disabilities, as a result. I was born with a mild case of it and it hasn't affected me in any way.


_________________
"We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all we need to make us really happy is something to be enthusiatic about." Charles Kingsley


YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

14 Feb 2013, 9:04 am

I have a cousin with spina biffida. He has a knot of flesh on his lower back, but it's only a cosmetic issue. His parents were told he would never walk, but he's perfectly fine. He's retired with grandkids now.


I think most people agree that aborting fetuses with severe deformities, such as those with no brain or those who would live short painful lives, is morally acceptable.
What about the "gray area" abnormalities, though? What about Down's Syndrome? People with Down's enjoy life and have a reasonable life span. However, to varying degreees they also require lifelong care, and can have medical problems. They require a lot of effort and money that the parents may not have to give.



The_Walrus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,878
Location: London

14 Feb 2013, 10:06 am

Until very recently- the past week or so- I was generally in favour of abortion. An embryo cannot reasonably be said to be a person, and if a woman is prepared to abort a foetus, which is an incredibly traumatic experience, then she's obviously strongly opposed to becoming a mother and will probably not be able to cope, one way or another.

Despite that, probably because I am disabled myself, I was against the termination of disabled foetuses, particularly if we started aborting autistic or dyslexic foetuses.

But then I though... why? That doesn't make sense. If anything, raising a disabled child is harder than raising an NT child, so abortion is probably more justified.

So I came to the conclusion that I am in favour of women or couples aborting their embryo or foetus after a genetic test confirms that they have a disability.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Feb 2013, 10:53 am

^

If we'd aborted people because of their having autism, we'd have lost great contributers like Einstein, Nicolai Tesla, Andy Warhol and Bill Gates.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


The_Walrus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,878
Location: London

14 Feb 2013, 11:20 am

thomas81 wrote:
^

If we'd aborted people because of their having autism, we'd have lost great contributers like Einstein, Nicolai Tesla, Andy Warhol and Bill Gates.

Except none of those people have an autism diagnosis? Tesla and Einstein both died before autism was thought of, Warhol is widely said to have been "putting it on", and even Gates hasn't been openly diagnosed.

Besides, not every mother would choose to abort their autistic child, just as many don't abort Downs children today.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

14 Feb 2013, 11:30 am

but to the uninformed mother, upon recieving the news they are to have an autistic child, what do you think their kneejerk reaction would be?

I am in no way in favour of curtailing access to abortion but conversely I want mothers to have access to information on disabilities, both the positive and negative aspects.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile