Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well.....Earlier this week, my aunt called the family to tell everyone that her son was diagnosed with autism. This unfortunate news prompted me to research a bit into the disease and it seems that doctors are very close to making a prenatal test for it.
Similarly to Down Syndrome, we can probably assume that when a prenatal test becomes available for autism, the fetuses diagnosed with the disease will vastly be aborted.
What are your all's thoughts on this? I'm particularly interested in hearing pro-lifeers opinions on the issue.
Its important to keep in mind that only a small minority of people diagnosed with autism fall on the 'high-functioning' end of the spectrum.
I guess I'll go first and say that I don't have a problem with women aborting a fetus if it is diagnosed with a disability in the womb.
Why even debate this. There are no restrictions on the why. You can abort because you had a bad day. Or downs. Or as in China, because it's a girl. Or when the test is created, gay. Its a womans right to abort a perfectly healthy future gay. But only if she thinks she may experience psychological irritation of some sort because of it. I'm sure you agree. How ironic if abortion on demand leads to the extinction of gays. The abortion tool scrapes both ways.
[quote=Marlow;10459368]I'm 100% pro-choice, but I would not have an abortion if I were carrying an autistic child. I know some autistic kids and they seem to be happy and are very interesting and quirky. Personally, at this point in my life, I would only terminate a pregnancy if it looked like the child was in for a life of misery from a severe physical or mental defect.[/quote]
Bolding mine.....Thank You!
Thank you fro thinking of the CHILD and not yourself as so many here have done.
They talk about what joy these severely handicapped bring to THEM.
Finally, someone who thinks of the gawdawful life the child would have...thinking of the child FIRST...bravo to you!
Newsflash: Many women abort fetuses with a disability because there's no available health care to help them with the child once it's born. I'm guessing you're one of the people who is against public health care? If so, case closed.
Saddling the US with a financially crippling monster so this woman can have her baby in an elevator or taxi sounds a bit wasteful. If this is your idea of a solution there is no reason to discuss it further. Case closed back atcha.
That’s not what she said at all.
She asked who would be willing to take in a severely and violently autistic person in their 20s.
You didn’t answer her question and got all huffy with your anti-choice stance.
Most anti-choicers are christers, or are you going to deny that as well.
.
Excuse me for trying to expand the discussion, chiel.
The original question was whether or not to abort a fetus that tested positive for autism Then the poster I was responding to asked who would take care of violently autistic adults - I then asked (not accusingly, btw but genuinely wondering) just where the line was drawn - prenately, infanthood childhood etc...
I wish she would have responded as this topic can encompass quite a lot of other issues.
As to christers -yep, there is a lot of them that are prolife. But not all. Not everything is black and white as you know...
Now as to whether or not I would take in an autistic child......I would keep my own and as we have discussed before I did adopt my son who had the possibility/probability of having CP. I am no hypocrite. But with autism the spectrum is so large chiel I do question how a test can possibly let a parent know the severity while still pregnant. Also there is still the debate about whether or not autism is environmental and developes after the child is born. So you see my question was quite relevent to the debate - if autism is caused and not congenital what would you advocate? Infanticide?
As far as my 'anti choice' stance, please. I am a full supporter of birth control including the morning after pill. I am also pragmatic enough to know that abortion can never be taken away thus the imperative to make it obsolete by better and more plentiful birth control. I hardly think that makes me an 'anti choicer christer'.
Well.....Earlier this week, my aunt called the family to tell everyone that her son was diagnosed with autism. This unfortunate news prompted me to research a bit into the disease and it seems that doctors are very close to making a prenatal test for it.
Similarly to Down Syndrome, we can probably assume that when a prenatal test becomes available for autism, the fetuses diagnosed with the disease will vastly be aborted.
What are your all's thoughts on this? I'm particularly interested in hearing pro-lifeers opinions on the issue.
Its important to keep in mind that only a small minority of people diagnosed with autism fall on the 'high-functioning' end of the spectrum.
I guess I'll go first and say that I don't have a problem with women aborting a fetus if it is diagnosed with a disability in the womb.
That is a hard question. Although I am not opposed to certain abortions, I wouldn't have my own child aborted due to an illness that does not put him/her in any particular pain. If the child would be unaware of his/her surroundings, I would think about it. Many autistic children, my stepson is autistic, are able to take care of themselves in adult life. So, to answer your question, I would have to know more impossible information about the fetus.
Excuse me for trying to expand the discussion, chiel.
The original question was whether or not to abort a fetus that tested positive for autism Then the poster I was responding to asked who would take care of violently autistic adults - I then asked (not accusingly, btw but genuinely wondering) just where the line was drawn - prenately, infanthood childhood etc...
I wish she would have responded as this topic can encompass quite a lot of other issues.
As to christers -yep, there is a lot of them that are prolife. But not all. Not everything is black and white as you know...
Now as to whether or not I would take in an autistic child......I would keep my own and as we have discussed before I did adopt my son who had the possibility/probability of having CP. I am no hypocrite. But with autism the spectrum is so large chiel I do question how a test can possibly let a parent know the severity while still pregnant. Also there is still the debate about whether or not autism is environmental and developes after the child is born. So you see my question was quite relevent to the debate - if autism is caused and not congenital what would you advocate? Infanticide?
As far as my 'anti choice' stance, please. I am a full supporter of birth control including the morning after pill. I am also pragmatic enough to know that abortion can never be taken away thus the imperative to make it obsolete by better and more plentiful birth control. I hardly think that makes me an 'anti choicer christer'.
Honestly, it looked more like an argument than opening the discussion.
The person probably had no idea of your religious (non)belief and based on this and other threads apparently made the wrong assumption.
Until a fetus is viable, I think it's fair game for abortion.
It doesn't matter what the reason.
Me, I was never going to put myself in that position.
I was purposely sterilized in another country so that I would never have to make that decision.
I don't have enough interest in children to put myself in that position, as we've discussed before.
I can understand her question about taking in older violently autistic people. It's probably not going to happen as the emotional and labor-intensive needs would far outweigh what any one person could handle.
I fully understand that there is a ot of anecdotal information about vaccinations and autism and the pain of parents who have had this experience. Chemicals have destroyed my life and they're powerful, especially in infants and the young. We use mercury in fillings, that's been related to MS.
For me, the answer to this thread is that a woman has the right to choose for whatever reason she might have.
Honestly, it looked more like an argument than opening the discussion.
The person probably had no idea of your religious (non)belief and based on this and other threads apparently made the wrong assumption.
Until a fetus is viable, I think it's fair game for abortion.
It doesn't matter what the reason.
Me, I was never going to put myself in that position.
I was purposely sterilized in another country so that I would never have to make that decision.
I don't have enough interest in children to put myself in that position, as we've discussed before.
I can understand her question about taking in older violently autistic people. It's probably not going to happen as the emotional and labor-intensive needs would far outweigh what any one person could handle.
I fully understand that there is a ot of anecdotal information about vaccinations and autism and the pain of parents who have had this experience. Chemicals have destroyed my life and they're powerful, especially in infants and the young. We use mercury in fillings, that's been related to MS.
For me, the answer to this thread is that a woman has the right to choose for whatever reason she might have.
The autistic part is simply a red herring.
Yeah, sorry if I came off combative -- sometimes tone gets lost when typing
But yes, it is a horrible conundrum. I'm very glad that none of my children are faced with autism - although my eldest is on the spectrum.
Why even debate this. There are no restrictions on the why. You can abort because you had a bad day. Or downs. Or as in China, because it's a girl. Or when the test is created, gay. Its a womans right to abort a perfectly healthy future gay. But only if she thinks she may experience psychological irritation of some sort because of it. I'm sure you agree. How ironic if abortion on demand leads to the extinction of gays. The abortion tool scrapes both ways.
I'm guessing it will be the women of the religious right sneaking off to have an abortion with a fake name when that test is available to see if the child is gay or not. Why would a Liberal want to kill a gay child? We are the ones who think its OK to be Gay, who believe you can't pray the Gay away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
