Glad I Don't Live In America.

Post Reply New Topic

That is easily determined by a karyotype of fetal tissue usually obtained by a chorionic biopsy. Downs is caused by the person having three copies of chromosome 21 rather than the usual two. This can be viewed directly under a microscope by treating the cells of the biopsy with chemicals that arrest mitosis.

Thankfully, the Democrats are in power now.
Oh, wait.

They can determine by the means I stated above for one hundred percent wether or not it's a person with Downs.

what to do about the orphans? who will take care of the unwanted ones?

Well, there may be reasons why the Democrats, now they are in power, don't/can't improve the welfare and healthcare systems, but the fact is, nothing seems to be improving to any significant degree.

And have you seen the "illegal immigrant" situation, lately?
A group of 30,000 and now a second group of 20,000.
I am not talking from a moral perspective.
I am talking from a practical position.

Imagine if America had no borders at all.
If you think your welfare and health systems are bad now, think about what it would be like if anyone who wanted to come to America simply walked in.
Would you be happy if the government cut your social security, healthcare or pension in half? <hyperbole>
"I don't think so, Tim."

The genetic evidence of Downs Syndrome can be found in the amniotic fluid, so an amniocentesis test is routinely recommended for all women over 35. The test can't tell you how bad the impact will be, only that it will be there. In fact, a woman who does not want that test will get significant push back because, apparently, doctor malpractice insurance companies are worried women will sue if they don't give birth to a perfect baby and no one warned them. I refused the test outright and I had to express multiple times that I would not have terminated my pregnancies regardless of what a test determined. The momentum of SOCIETY to not give birth to a downs syndrome child is unfortunately strong, to the point where an evangelical Christian friend told me she felt it would be unfair to the child to give them life. Having watched some children with Downs grow up and become lovely adults I could not disagree more. The fears about selective abortion for genetic conditions that are viewed by society as life impairing are not at all unfounded, but to characterize the risk of eugenics as a "convenience" decision by the mother is absolutely false. It is so much more complicated than that.

I urge women to ask their medical provider not only why the amnio test is being recommended, but what they are supposed to do once they have the results. What actions are available? As science advances perhaps there will be more actions besides termination available as an option, but when I was pregnant there were not. All I could have done with the information was choose termination. For that reason, I saw no reason to know. While the risks of the test are minuscule, they are not non-existent, and I saw no reason to add any risk, no matter how minuscule, to obtain information I would not act on.

Expanding here, though, I have to say: I don't understand how people who haven't had to live any of these decisions, or haven't been in deep conversation with those who have, can consider themselves to be in a position to suggest what the right answer to unfortunate reality of abortion is. There are questions in this thread that are so basic, it really shows to me how completely under-educated most people are when it comes to women's reproductive health.

This is the more invasive of the testing options, carries the most risk to the fetus, and is not the test routinely recommended. Amniocentesis is.

The Democrats are now in government.
I don't think you have a leg to stand on.

Start protesting about how the Democrats aren't doing enough.
Whip your 2 "conservative" Democrats into line and get some bills pushed through.
It isn't about the GOP or Trump any longer, from what I can see.

Everything/k is so damned easy when people are in the opposition.
Much harder to govern when people are in government.

You missed the whole of a question by question explanation of the American healthcare system that followed the post you are citing, and occurs before your response shows up in this thread. I'm not going to run through it again just because you haven't read it all yet. It's complicated, and I've come to realize that people from other countries don't understand our system at all, or what powers the federal has - or does not have - to change it. How we do things is too far out of your personal experience. I didn't realize that until answering a lot of questions that I realized later were missing key context. So start with one of my last posts explaining the employer based insurance system and then work backwards. Page 28.

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 27 Sep 2021, 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

But the Democrats did introduce Obamacare when Obama was President.
What is stopping the Dems doing something/k now?
A lesser majority than when Obama was king?

I've answered it all in older posts. Go to page 28 and work backwards. I answered it all quite matter of factually and with a third party perspective. I wasn't trying to sell anything or blame anyone, just explain.

I have a problem with Blab's super-duper hyperpartisanship.
He blames *everything/k* on the republicans and, under the circumstances, that is logically very difficult to believe.

Recently I have learnt about 2 "conservative" Democrats.
Well, it seems they are contributing to the political inertia.
May I suggest people vote them out, for a start?

BTW, which party did you vote for, in the last election?

You can get all the answers you want on Reddit.

You won't get away with your sealioning there but if you really want answers they're available.

Are things improving under the Democrats?

Absolutely Not ...!

Are you seriously saying the Democratic politicians are squeaky clean?