Mother has abortion at eight months

[Lace Neil Singer]

https://uk.lifestyle.yahoo.com/-what...080124682.html

Before you judge, read her story. This wasn't an easy decision for any mother to make, it was heartbreaking. This is a quote from the article which sums up what kind of life a child with Dandy-Walker syndrome would lead:

“We expect your baby to have moderate to severe mental retardation; she’s going to have moderate to severe physical disability; she is probably never going to walk or talk; she will possibly never be able to lift her head; she is going to have seizures all of the time.”

The doctor looked so uncomfortable. He said, “Babies like this one are not generally comfortable enough to sleep.”

Basically, it would be a short life, full of endless pain, suffering and misery. We're not talking about a Down's baby, who has quality of life and a future. A baby like this would have no future, and no real life. To be forced to be alive and suffer endless torture would be inhuman. Yet some pro-lifers would still insist that this was murder.

[s_stabeler]

I will say that I generally dislike late abortions. On the other hand, this is about as clear-cut a case as you are going to get of a situation where it is justifiable.

I WILL say, though, that there should rightfully be severe restrictions on late-term abortions, in that it needs to be proven that the baby would have no hope of any quality fo life whatsoever. Otherwise, you do risk situations where a kid is aborted just because it would be a bit difficult for the parents ( for example, an ADHD kid can be difficult to raise- or a Down's syndrome kid- but neither condition is severe enough, if I recall what down's syndrome is, to justify a late-term abortion_

[AccountingDrone]

I agree, this was definitely the right quality of life for the *child* choice.

[Shangri-laschild]

I will say that I generally dislike late abortions. On the other hand, this is about as clear-cut a case as you are going to get of a situation where it is justifiable.

I WILL say, though, that there should rightfully be severe restrictions on late-term abortions, in that it needs to be proven that the baby would have no hope of any quality fo life whatsoever. Otherwise, you do risk situations where a kid is aborted just because it would be a bit difficult for the parents ( for example, an ADHD kid can be difficult to raise- or a Down's syndrome kid- but neither condition is severe enough, if I recall what down's syndrome is, to justify a late-term abortion_

Just from reading the comments, it's clear that some question whether this was as cut and dry. I am happy though that most people seem to be responding respectfully and kindly and I agree that she made the right choice. But it's also pointing out that no matter what, that clear cut line will always be different for people. While in a perfect world I wouldn't mind restrictions in place, I worry about how they would work when there is such a strong anti abortion movement anyway.

[BlaqueKatt]

for example, an ADHD kid can be difficult to raise- or a Down's syndrome kid- but neither condition is severe enough, if I recall what down's syndrome is, to justify a late-term abortion_

depends on the severity, Some will do fine on their own as adults, some in a group home setting and some will live with their parents until the parents die and be sent to an institution or worse. And that's *IF* the parents raise the child(if they can handle it, some can't and if the issue is forced that's when you get resentment and abuse), if they don't it's foster care and group homes for life, which also causes issues with attachment. So It's not just a blanket thing someone else can arbitrarily decide for another person. In the second story, the care will be passed on to his sibling, so he's responsible for his grown brother AND his own family.

two stories.

One who aborted

One who didn't(but would if she'd had the choice)

edited to add: downs syndrome is often comorbid with other health issues, some which require numerous surgeries and lifelong followup, which is hard when the child can fully comprehend what's being done and why, it's much more difficult for the child and parents alike when the child(or adult) is unable to understand fully.

[wolfie]

edited to add: downs syndrome is often comorbid with other health issues, some which require numerous surgeries and lifelong followup, which is hard when the child can fully comprehend what's being done and why, it's much more difficult for the child and parents alike when the child(or adult) is unable to understand fully.

Definitely. A relative of mine has Down's, along with type 1 diabetes. Anyone first meeting him would peg him as a developmentally-delayed pre-teen (combination of size and mental capacity) - but he's nearly 40 years old.

[s_stabeler]

not actually my point- although i appreciate the information. My point is that I go by the child's quality of life once it would be born, not by the convenience to the parents. ( this is for late-term abortions, by the way. for an ordinary abortion, i don't actually care about the reason, albeit if someone was using abortion as an alternative to birth control, i might roll my eyes)

[BlaqueKatt]

not actually my point- although i appreciate the information. My point is that I go by the child's quality of life once it would be born, not by the convenience to the parents.

nice so someone outside the situation decides if it's something they know they can't handle, which WILL impact quality of life, or convenience.
Because this is better, which because people are judged as "shallow" and worried about being "inconvenienced", kids are neglected and DIE.

The sister couldn't go to school and care for her brother, that was "inconvenient", other siblings being made to care for siblings and themselves, oops inconvenient.

Sorry, everyone, your lives and situations are all exactly the same and someone else will judge you, based on some arbitrary standard./sarcasm

[s_stabeler]

first, I am talking about a LATE-TERM abortion- if you would be unable to care for a kid, then abort earlier in the pregnancy.

second, if it is a case where the parents can't cope/can't be bothered (I'm not conflating the two- merely that both cases have the same remedy), but another family could, that is what adoption is for.

to summarise: if the kid would be unable to have a decent quality of life, then abortion is fine. if it is a case where the kid would be a bit more difficult to raise ( like an ADHD kid is) then it is not fine to use health issues of the baby to get an abortion.

edit- oh, and your example actually had very little to do with the kid's disability- the article actually explicitly says the kid had a happy and healthy life, until the abusive father came home. So yes, i would say that that kid is an example of when not to abort. (it's an issue of an abusive father, not one of a kid too sick to have any quality of life)- at no point was the sister unable to go to school, so i don't know where you get that from.

[Estil]

My first thought actually was like this, what if they don't discover this sort of thing until after the baby is born? And if that late an abortion is really honest to goodness necessary, did they (or can they?) at least do so in a way that the baby won't feel any pain (I believe it's at five months or so that the unborn child can feel pain?)? I have read/seen all the different ways abortions are done and it really makes me sick to my stomach because it looks like nothing less than torture.

[Aragarthiel]

My first thought actually was like this, what if they don't discover this sort of thing until after the baby is born?

Usually conditions that are that severe are fatal at some point, so you just cope with it.

And if that late an abortion is really honest to goodness necessary, did they (or can they?) at least do so in a way that the baby won't feel any pain (I believe it's at five months or so that the unborn child can feel pain?)?

In the article in the OP, they seem to essentially euthanize the baby, which yes, should be painless.

[Estil]

Good. If an abortion really has to be done then it needs to be done as painlessly as possible for both mother and child.

[Aragarthiel]

At eight months, it would be impossible to be totally painless for the mother, not just emotionally but physically. The mother would either go through a c-section or induction of labor, and neither are really painless. But those kinds of pain are necessary at that point.

[AccountingDrone]

The sister couldn't go to school and care for her brother, that was "inconvenient", other siblings being made to care for siblings and themselves, oops inconvenient.

Sorry - big fucking difference between popping a kid out and taking care of it, that is *your* decision. Having your parents pop out a kid and forcing you to take care of it - *not* your decision.

Here, let me pop a kid out and drop it off - you don't want it? so sorry, fuck you .... that is effectively what is happening to the kids that have to take care of a sibling.

[jedimaster91]

at least do so in a way that the baby won't feel any pain (I believe it's at five months or so that the unborn child can feel pain?)? I have read/seen all the different ways abortions are done and it really makes me sick to my stomach because it looks like nothing less than torture.

I've seen articles (that I've taken with a rather large grain of salt given I found them on the internet) that say the unborn can feel pain far earlier than 5 months. Which I can believe because every time I've gone for an ultrasound (first one at ~7wks), my kid either rolls away from the probe or kicks at it. If they can notice an ultrasound probe (or the soundwaves coming from it) and it bothers them enough to move away, surely they can feel pain. Though it's tough to say for sure because obviously they can't tell us if something hurts, nor do I think it's something that's been well-researched.

My own support for abortions is limited, though I want them to stay legal so that they can be done safely and under a doctor's supervision. Life of the mother and life of the child are the top two reasons for me (there are others), but even then it should be a carefully thought out decision. I realize that in some cases there's no time to really think about it (emergency happens and it comes down to either mom or baby), but that's why mothers should make their wishes known ahead of time. In this case, I think she made the right call. Genetic testing has come a long way in recent years so parents can make informed decisions about continuing a pregnancy (though if you have no family history of inherited diseases, you're going to be paying through the nose to get it -_- ). I wouldn't wish on anyone the painful, short life that poor baby would have had.