How far would you go if a pre-natal test for Autism emerged?

Page 3 of 6 [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


How far is your limit? Would you fight to the ends of the earth?
I would protest within the confines of the law 38%  38%  [ 15 ]
I would be prepared to break the law but not endanger human life if needed 44%  44%  [ 17 ]
I would be prepared to break the law and endanger human life if needed 13%  13%  [ 5 ]
I would delibrately endanger life to fight it. 5%  5%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 39

garyww
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2008
Age: 78
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,395
Location: Napa, California

13 Jan 2009, 12:30 pm

How would the test determine where the fetus might lay on the spectrum? The child could be LFA or HFA. would that have to be a part of criteria?
What if well meaning people decided that 'nearsightedness' was a detriment to society, or 'deafness', or 'blindness'.
I would think that once any difference in a persons ability to 'function' in the world has been identified then all similar things that cause various dysfunctions should also be tested for. Like hair color, eye color, skin color. What if in a mixed marriage the childs skin color was tested for? Would the ACLU allow that?
A long time ago a political group in Germany had thoughts about testing people to weed out various characteristics that were deemed less than desireable in society and that experiment didn't work out to well.


_________________
I am one of those people who your mother used to warn you about.


garyww
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2008
Age: 78
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,395
Location: Napa, California

13 Jan 2009, 12:30 pm

How would the test determine where the fetus might lay on the spectrum? The child could be LFA or HFA. would that have to be a part of criteria?
What if well meaning people decided that 'nearsightedness' was a detriment to society, or 'deafness', or 'blindness'.
I would think that once any difference in a persons ability to 'function' in the world has been identified then all similar things that cause various dysfunctions should also be tested for. Like hair color, eye color, skin color. What if in a mixed marriage the childs skin color was tested for? Would the ACLU allow that?
A long time ago a political group in Germany had thoughts about testing people to weed out various characteristics that were deemed less than desireable in society and that experiment didn't work out to well.


_________________
I am one of those people who your mother used to warn you about.


millie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2008
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,154

13 Jan 2009, 12:44 pm

you at it again mr garyww?



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

13 Jan 2009, 12:47 pm

Actually, I would do none of the above, as far as the polling options go. In my experience, you don't win value wars by radical means, or even protesting. It's a matter of education, more than anything. You have to change hearts and minds.

One look at the mess we've been in here in the US with abortion will tell you that the above is true.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

13 Jan 2009, 12:47 pm

sinsboldly wrote:
so is this poll only for people that are against it?

then you already know the answer to the poll. The rest is just window dressing.

Merle

No - I want to see who is actually going to be able to do something about it. So far we have a few up for the general strike and 12 up for the revolution. 12 brave people who actually know what the right thing is and totally believe in it. As for those prepared to become young Theodores if needs be - at least some people are totally in for the cause.

Though I did add an option for those who wanted to roll over entirely, it just didn't come through.



Sora
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,906
Location: Europe

13 Jan 2009, 1:42 pm

Nothing? 'As you like it' If it's voluntary.


_________________
Autism + ADHD
______
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. Terry Pratchett


garyww
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2008
Age: 78
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,395
Location: Napa, California

13 Jan 2009, 1:43 pm

I've been waiting for revolution since 1967.


_________________
I am one of those people who your mother used to warn you about.


Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

13 Jan 2009, 1:50 pm

Tails wrote:
Why are all the answers in the poll so angry and negative? Can't you see a plus side to having prior knowledge of your child's condition? I think it would be a great idea for parents to know in advance what kind of special care their child might need, and to be given time to research and prepare for the arrival of an autistic child. Many parents are completely thrown for a loop by their child's 'problems' and differences, and often don't have any idea what they are dealing with. Surely being pre-warned and prepared can only be a good thing?

They are welcome to test the children a week or two after birth - that is totally fine by me. It still gives them a year or two at least to prepare. Its testing in the womb I object to.



11krage
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 132

13 Jan 2009, 2:09 pm

With all the trash on the media lately about all the downfalls of autism, it would severely decrease the amount of children with autism born. You only have to look at china's population of girls vs boys right now to get the idea of the future if the test came.

In the minds of a scary amount of people, the choice they'll hear if asked if they want to carry a autistic child to term is 'do I want to look after this screaming, violent child who has no feelings, will suffer, be in constant pain (where did they get that from?), never say a word to me and have the IQ of a toddler forever. Because thats all that autism is people, spectrum is too much of a difficult concept ironically :roll: , and the idea that a child who can't express feelings or intelligence actually has them doesn't get through to people either.

Now if someone actually did a documentary of the acheivements of autistics. They could talk about history's greats, such as einstein and explain why those like him were said to have autism, how it contributed to his achievements. How many people with the diagnosis are productive members of society (every NT i'm talked to so far think that most diagnosed can't possibly hold down a job, get married, go to university). Then some of the acheivements of current diagnosed autistics, perhaps even comparisons between NT's and autistics, such as proportion of high achieving scientists with traits.

Then it could end by highlighting terrible goals of places like 'autism speaks' with an appeal to not let them jeprodise the future of people on the spectrum. A nice poll of those diagnosed who say that autism speaks speaks for them or doesn't would be useful too.

Seesh, I really want something like that on tv. With all the rubbish on, that I would love to see, something that actually put the right facts out there instead of all this misinformation.


_________________
'Its always the quiet ones' :

http://the-quiet-ones.blogspot.com/


Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

13 Jan 2009, 2:17 pm

11krage wrote:
With all the trash on the media lately about all the downfalls of autism, it would severely decrease the amount of children with autism born. You only have to look at china's population of girls vs boys right now to get the idea of the future if the test came.

In the minds of a scary amount of people, the choice they'll hear if asked if they want to carry a autistic child to term is 'do I want to look after this screaming, violent child who has no feelings, will suffer, be in constant pain (where did they get that from?), never say a word to me and have the IQ of a toddler forever. Because thats all that autism is people, spectrum is too much of a difficult concept ironically :roll: , and the idea that a child who can't express feelings or intelligence actually has them doesn't get through to people either.

Now if someone actually did a documentary of the acheivements of autistics. They could talk about history's greats, such as einstein and explain why those like him were said to have autism, how it contributed to his achievements. How many people with the diagnosis are productive members of society (every NT i'm talked to so far think that most diagnosed can't possibly hold down a job, get married, go to university). Then some of the acheivements of current diagnosed autistics, perhaps even comparisons between NT's and autistics, such as proportion of high achieving scientists with traits.

Then it could end by highlighting terrible goals of places like 'autism speaks' with an appeal to not let them jeprodise the future of people on the spectrum. A nice poll of those diagnosed who say that autism speaks speaks for them or doesn't would be useful too.

Seesh, I really want something like that on tv. With all the rubbish on, that I would love to see, something that actually put the right facts out there instead of all this misinformation.

One problem, no one would watch it and those who do will quickly forget about it. Look at how little impact Rain Man has had.

In other news WP's bravery count has gone up a notch.



11krage
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 132

13 Jan 2009, 2:29 pm

Quote:
One problem, no one would watch it and those who do will quickly forget about it. Look at how little impact Rain Man has had.

In other news WP's bravery count has gone up a notch.


Bad example, rain man had a huge impact, still has. Just not in all the right ways. How many people have upon raising the topic of autism been replied to with 'oh like rain man'. It's happened a lot to the people i've talked to.

Well, they can afford to make those other documentaries about autism, I reckon one on acheivements of autism would do as well if not better. At the autism talks I've spoken at I can think of at least a few hundred, just that I've met that would be over the moon about something positive about autism. So I think it would do well and change the perceptions at least some.


_________________
'Its always the quiet ones' :

http://the-quiet-ones.blogspot.com/


Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

13 Jan 2009, 5:01 pm

11krage wrote:
Quote:
One problem, no one would watch it and those who do will quickly forget about it. Look at how little impact Rain Man has had.

In other news WP's bravery count has gone up a notch.


Bad example, rain man had a huge impact, still has. Just not in all the right ways. How many people have upon raising the topic of autism been replied to with 'oh like rain man'. It's happened a lot to the people i've talked to.

Well, they can afford to make those other documentaries about autism, I reckon one on acheivements of autism would do as well if not better. At the autism talks I've spoken at I can think of at least a few hundred, just that I've met that would be over the moon about something positive about autism. So I think it would do well and change the perceptions at least some.

No matter how many documentaries people watch, nearly all of them are going to do what the doctors advise them to do. Which almost certainly would be to abort.

Yes such a documentary would be great (In fact I think there have been quite a few fairly positive ones on TV now and then), but there would be little or no impact.



MizLiz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Nov 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 890
Location: USA

13 Jan 2009, 5:14 pm

I'm pro-choice. I wouldn't oppose it. Some people don't want what they assume is going to be a "damaged" child. As offensive as I may find that, I have to allow them to make that decision.



Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

13 Jan 2009, 5:19 pm

MizLiz wrote:
I'm pro-choice. I wouldn't oppose it. Some people don't want what they assume is going to be a "damaged" child. As offensive as I may find that, I have to allow them to make that decision.

What about our choices?



MizLiz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Nov 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 890
Location: USA

13 Jan 2009, 5:23 pm

What about them? If it's your body and your pregnancy, then it's your choice. If it's not, then go away.

Don't bother giving me that "it's one of us" BS or mentioning genocide.



Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

13 Jan 2009, 5:26 pm

MizLiz wrote:
What about them? If it's your body and your pregnancy, then it's your choice. If it's not, then go away.

Don't bother giving me that "it's one of us" BS or mentioning genocide.

The impact on our lives of prenatal testing must come before the right of someone to carry out eugenics - they are welcome to stick the baby up for adoption after birth if they are so worried.

Frankly if someone does start implementing a pre-natal test - I think some of us might be taking some choices too. Not sure how pretty the result would be.