Quote of the Day 12-1-09
An obstetrician told me excitedly about a new blood test that will allow pregnant women to discover if the child they are carrying has Down syndrome. The good news, he told me, is that we will no longer have to worry about “unfortunate births.”
This doctor intended no offense. But his comment reflects a prevailing attitude that presumes we would all be better off if these children are eliminated before they are born.
I’ll admit that my views are influenced by my 13-year-old daughter Molly, a vibrant child with her own dreams and personality. To us, she is not defined by her disability but by the joy she has brought into our lives.
I don’t presume to tell others what to do when they are faced with these difficult decisions. But I worry that women who find themselves pregnant with a child who has a physical or mental disability get only one message, which is all about the burden about to be dumped in their laps.
Today, 9 out of 10 American women who are told they have a child with Down syndrome choose to abort. I think it’s fair to say that if some of these potential parents had a glimpse of the other side they might have made a different decision.
~Lon Jacobs, attorney and self-described pro-choice Democrat, in his Wall Street Journal opinion column, November 27
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“I think it’s fair to say that if some of these potential parents had a glimpse of the other side they might have made a different decision.”
Amen! Now that is what I call common ground!
When it comes to those born with Down Syndrome, and others who live with various disabilities that require care from others (including elderly, as well)… let me tell you something. It is true that they need us.
But you know what? We need them even more than they need us. We need them for our humanity. If we don’t love them, God still will. But we need to love them; we need to serve them. What we do to the least of these, we do to Jesus Christ. When we turn a blind eye and a cold shoulder to these precious ones, we turn away from God’s calling.
“I think it’s fair to say that if some of these potential parents had a glimpse of the other side they might have made a different decision.”
Amen! This this is what I call common ground!
How does the “pro-choice” Mr. Jacobs think that these “potential parents” of Down syndrome babies will ever get a glimpse of “the other side” when 9 times out of 10 these children are killed in the womb. Whose fault is it that they “get only one message?” Hint: not the pro-lifers!
Is this man schizophrenic or what.
Current tests are 95% accurate. So, if 100 couples abort due to positive, 5 babies WITHOUT Down Syndrome are aborted because they were falsely diagnosed as having Down Syndrome. Thank God each of us reading and typing did not have a false-positive, or each of us would have a 90% change of being aborted. Each of us is a potential false positive. If each of the 4+ million babies born in the U.S. per year were tested, roughly 5% would test false-positive. That would be 200,000 per year. If 90% of those aborted, that would be 180,000 babies aborted per year for false-positive Down test. If this new, improved test is 1% false-positive, then this would mean ONLY 36,000 babies aborted per year under false suspicion of having Down Syndrome. Wow! Progress!
I went to a baby store today and saw a mother with her 14 month old daughter sitting on the cart. Her daughter has down syndrome. I told her that her daughter was adorable. This child was smiling at everyone she saw. We exchanged a few lines about our children but I will never forget what she said last..”Aren’t they just wonderful?”. This is the “other side” this democrat was talking about. Children are truly wonderful. I walked away with tears in my eyes.
Sometimes its so hard for people to grasp the thought of unconditional love. That mother had it. I’m so glad she did.
I thought an amniocentesis is 99.8% accurate. Are there other tests that are used to diagnose down syndrome?
Well, most of you are aware that my young sister in law has Down’s Syndrome… and I could NOT imagine my life without her in it! She is the most precious, alive, fun (sometimes frustrating, as she does have the same Irish/English temperament as the rest of the family and can be VERY stubborn!) wonderful child… I love that we moved in just up the street from my in-laws this year and get to be around her more than ever.
She got off the bus the other night from her program at UCP and I happened to be over visiting my FIL. We walked up to the bus to greet her and she turned excitedly to the bus driver when she saw me. “That’s my sister!” she said. The driver said, “Hi sister!” I grinned and waved back. My SIL got a huge grin on her face and said, “I have three sisters. And I am an aunt!” Then she gave me a huge hug and a kiss. I walked home buoyant, as I always am after spending time with her… she makes my heart sing. Unconditional love… whenever I forget what it is like, she patiently teaches me again. I need her far more than she needs me.
Ella, They are trying to develop a new test right now, that will be able to test MUCH earlier than before. Otherwise, it is the CVS and the amnio for now.
“But I worry that women who find themselves pregnant with a child who has a physical or mental disability get only one message, which is all about the burden about to be dumped in their laps.”
I can’t help but notice that Lon Jacobs fails to mention how this message impacts the person with Down’s who grows up knowing there are people in the world who view him as a “burden”.
* * *
“An obstetrician told me excitedly about a new blood test that will allow pregnant women to discover if the child they are carrying has Down syndrome. The good news, he told me, is that we will no longer have to worry about “unfortunate births.” This doctor intended no offense. But his comment reflects a prevailing attitude that presumes we would all be better off if these children are eliminated before they are born.”
I cringe when I hear a doctor refer to an “unfortunate birth”. Does he think he is smarter than God who gives life?
Ella, there are several other tests. The problem with the CVS and Amnio is that they cause miscarriage 3-5% of the time. Thus, children die due to the testing,regardless of if they actually have a chromosomal abnormality.
I’m not sure about the rate of false positives for this new blood test.
Is the CVS test riskier than an amnio because I was told by my doctor that an amnio has a miscarriage rate of 1 in 1600? I have never heard anything about the CVS test. Why is it used over the other ones?
I was told the amnio had a much higher risk of miscarriage than 1 in 1600. Doing a quick google search I found 1 in 200.
CVS has about a 4% miscarriage rate, but it can be done earlier in pregnany.
Ella, when my wife was pregnant the second time, we had a consult to help us decide if she should have an amnio. The risk of something happening because of the procedure is 1 in 200. Since my wife was going to be 38 at the time of birth, the risk of finding something was 1 in 68. We opted for the test so we would know earlier if something was found. There is no way we would have not chosen life.
My sister has a son with Down syndrome. She knew. Despite being a far left condescending liberal, she choice life for her son. He is 6 years old now. He3 has been signing since he was 2. He is training in karate with his sister to help his muscle tone. He is small is height but big hearted. Not to mention ever the curious explorer. His mom supports the planned health reform that will kill him by denying him treatment if he gets seriously ill. His Q score is zero under the formula that will be used.
I believe the Hegellian utilitarians of the Third Reich referred to these gifts of God as ‘useless eaters’ or to use the euphemism of the todays ‘dead babies r us’ crowd: Those who will never have productive years (be a source of continuing revenue for the ‘state’ or a reliable source of political support unless ACORN can register them to vote by absentee ballot).
yor bro ken
for my bck-of-the-envelope calculations, I used referenced info from wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndrome#Screening
Another question is: for all tests performed, at 5% false-positive, what portion are ‘confirmed’ by CVS? -thus dropping the babies killed due to mistakenly judging them to have Down Syndrome?
I doubt that more than half of these 5%-false-positive screening tests are followed up with CVS. I could be wrong. I have no evidence for this, just a guess – seeing as how abort-happy our nation is when receiving a screening result positive for down (whether true or false positive).
“We” are concerned, and keep (sorry – Bush is no longer in office – ) I mean KEPT a body count of U.S. soldier deaths in Iraq: each thousand was – WAS – noted as a big deal. So, feel free to modify my back-of-the-envelope figures if you want – 36,000 is way more than the U.S. casualties that upset us so much when bush was in office (now that Obama is in office, we have responded to party central and we no longer keep count).
Please understand that I do not think it would be OK to abort a baby if the test were never wrong. I am just pointing out how barbaric this issue is if we (U.S. community in general with our legal abortion) actually stop and look at what we are doing, versus change-the-topic-to-oppression, etc.
fishydude: to me the amazing thing is that the doctors are “targeting” 38 year old women for search and destroy testing. It’s outrageous.
As I’ve mentioned here before, I have a friend who was told that she HAD to undergo amnio if she wanted to continue receiving care from her doctor.
She was 35 years old.
I think Lon Jacobs demonstrates the disconnect that exists in people today – a real conflict and misunderstanding about “choice” and what our choice can mean for others.
It sounds like he/she’s prolife in her heart but it hasn’t reached the brain yet. Maybe Molly will help with that. One can only hope….
Years ago I had a stepson with Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy, a terminal illness that causes complete immobility. We heard during a newscast that it was possible to diagnose the disease en utero. He asked me why someone would do that, so I told him, “Because some women would have an abortion” if they knew they were carrying a child with the disease he had.
After a long silence from him, he said, “Well, I’m glad I was born.” He was 16 when he died. During the three years we knew him, he provided my children and me with more positive learning experiences than we have ever received from any one person simply through his quiet patience and tolerance. We will never forget him.
Kathleen,
What a gift your stepson was to you and your family. Brought tears to my eyes.