Receieve email updates!

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Prenatal Diagnosis

Lately I've been getting lots of feedback regarding prenatal testing and the abortions that follow some of the results.

First of all, I should say that I think prenatal testing is very important. Not just so a mother can terminate if she wants to, but also so if something is detected, a family has time to educate themselves and prepare for the new child that is coming into their lives. In my mind, it makes perfect sense. And of course, if for some reason or another a family or mother is unable to have a child with a disability, or the child is suffering or has a fatal defect, I believe the mother has the right to terminate. But, of course, that's just me.

An argument among many pro-lifers is that prenatal testing should not be done because it increases the percentage of abortions. But should it really be outlawed? Doesn't a family have the right to know, whether it's because they plan to terminate, or just need the opportunity to educate themselves on what they're dealing with. Another issue that pro-lifers have with prenatal testing is that they think it not only leads to more abortions, but late term abortions. This is not necessarily the case. Many problems can be detected as early as 10 weeks or so via ultrasound (though it is true, many issues don't present themselves until later in pregnancy).

So, where do you stand with this issue?

8 comments:

  1. I think prenatal testing should stay. My brother-in-law has Downs and we have done the testing with all three of the boys so we could be prepared. Too bad there was not a way to find out about Aaron's cleft palate ahead of time. That way, maybe Kennestone would have been prepared and my child would not have been admited to Scottish Rite a week later for failure to thrive.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jessica, did you guys get the testing done solely for the purpose of preparation? We did the AFP testing with Phoenix because it was offered and we wanted to be prepared if there was anything that was off. I didn't think I would have had the heart to terminate unless the issue was causing him to suffer.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes we did. It was solely for preperation. I would not have the heart to terminate either unless like you said it was causing them to suffer or going to seriously hurt me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Like I've said, one need not be "pro life" to oppose the way in which prenatal testing to recommend abortion when disabilities are detected in utero. MOreover, as others have said, the problem isn't that the tests are there, it's how people are counseled or influenced regarding the lives of those with disabilities.

    ReplyDelete
  5. For instance, consider this piece by a pro choice mother of a daughter with Down Syndrome:
    http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/choosing-to-have-a-child-with-down-syndrome/

    ReplyDelete
  6. And my thoughts lie here, safepres...

    http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/rick_santorum_and_prenatal_testing_i_would_have_saved_my_son_from_his_suffering_.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. BTW, I follow Emily on Facebook and watching Ronan's struggles, as well as his mother's heartbreak through it all is devastating.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dude, Down Syndrome and Tay Sachs are two ENTIRELY different animals. That's not even comparing apples to oranges...it's like comparing apples to tracker tires. Have you finished reading the links I posted?

    ReplyDelete