New York Times writer mourns her friend’s lost opportunity to abort her child with Down syndrome

Trig Palin on his first day of school.

Trig Palin on his first day of school.

LifeSiteNews: Since October is Down Syndrome Awareness Month, Jane Brody wrote a piece for the New York Times detailing advancements in prenatal testing. And while I’ve spoken multiple times about not blaming prenatal testing for the disgustingly high Down syndrome abortion rate, the two will seemingly always be linked. Brody’s article serves as a perfect case in point: she starts off her piece lamenting that a friend of hers was not given the choice to abort her child with Down syndrome.

More than 30 years ago, a 37-year-old friend of mine with an unplanned fourth pregnancy was told by her obstetrician that an amniocentesis was “too dangerous” and could cause a miscarriage. She ultimately bore a child severely affected by Down syndrome, which could have been detected with the test.

Today, my friend’s story would have a different trajectory. She would have a series of screening tests, and if the results suggested a high risk of Down syndrome, then an amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (C.V.S.) to make the diagnosis. She’d be given the option to abort the pregnancy.

In the future, a woman who decides to continue a Down syndrome pregnancy may also be offered prenatal treatment to temper the developmental harm to the fetus.

Developmental harm to the fetus? Down syndrome isn’t some virus that slowly destroys your unborn child if not “tempered” by prenatal treatment. “Severely affected” by Down syndrome? You aren’t affected to a certain degree by Down syndrome. You either have the extra chromosome or you don’t. These are the words of a shockingly misinformed woman who has absolutely no clue what she is talking about – yet she is being given a platform to spew her uninformed drivel to millions of people, and to further negative, outdated stereotypes about Down syndrome while she’s at it.

Worst of all, however, is the insinuation that her friend could have avoided the tragedy of her child “severely affected” with Down syndrome had she only been given the amniocentesis, and then been able to have an abortion. Clearly, many women make that exact choice, so it isn’t a shocking or crazy thought. But I can’t help but wonder what her friend actually thinks.

It’s a lot easier to be afraid of the unknown when you have a prenatal diagnosis – and can therefore choose abortion – than it is to look at a living, breathing child whom you’re holding in your arms and think, “Gee, my life would be so much better if I could smother you with a pillow.”

Does Brody’s friend regret having her child with Down syndrome? It’s possible, but I’d be willing to bet that she loves her child and does not regret having him or her in her life. There aren’t many parents out there who look at their children and think about how they wish they could have killed them when they had the chance – they exist, but they’re rare.

This father completely changed his mind about his daughter with Down syndrome and regrets pushing his wife to abort her.

Regardless of how this woman’s friend feels, though, this is yet another example of why so many parents feel the need to get an abortion after receiving a prenatal diagnosis. The testing isn’t the problem – that’s just a tool. Instead, we have people like Jane Brody, who have absolutely no clue what they’re talking about, making a diagnosis of Down syndrome appear to be a tragedy, and acting like these people are problems to be avoided if possible.

Never does Brody mention the amazing advancements in medicine that have more than doubled the life expectancy of people with Down syndrome; she does not mention that improved education and early intervention programs are allowing people with Down syndrome to do and achieve more than they ever have before. (Perhaps this is where she gets the idea that her friend’s child, born three decades ago, is “severely affected” – these programs and medical advancements didn’t exist then.)

Instead, the article peddles the same old tired, negative, outdated stereotypes. It presents prenatal testing as a chance to weed out any children who might be defective. Jane Brody had an opportunity here to actually educate and create more awareness about Down Syndrome. Instead, she did the exact opposite. Shame on her.

DCG

 

Please follow and like us:
0
 

0 responses to “New York Times writer mourns her friend’s lost opportunity to abort her child with Down syndrome

  1. I was a case mgr. for those with developmental disabilities/challenges for 23 yrs. until I was laid off 3.5 yrs. ago due to continued yearly cuts to Medicaid in my state. But, that aside, I have worked with quite a few babies, children and adults. I have observed and worked with them in institutions, group homes, their parents’ homes, supported independent living situations (apts.) and helped them with job placements in workshops and in the community. Less challenged individuals, with the right jobs, can eventually work in the community independently without job coaches remaining on site except for follow-up.
    Of course, similar to Autism, Downs Syndrome can span a wide range of abilities. A family with a child who is severely affected will not have the same hope for the future of that child as a family who has a child who is mildly affected.
    Regardless of the diagnosis, almost all Downs Syndrome children are very loving and trusting. The ones who aren’t, unfortunately, are usually being raised by abusive parents.
    But, the life of parents who raise Downs Syndrome children is filled with many challenges, even for those with children who have less challenges. They have to wade through the system that prevails in the state, county and city/town they live in. The services that are offered are not equal even in a particular state depending on where one lives.
    Most parents I worked with were ultimately concerned about laying the groundwork to make sure their adult child was taken care of once they, as parents, have passed on. Some will move to another state if they think it will provide better for their child.
    These are families I enjoyed working with because, even though they are living a life different from what they thought it was going to be, in retrospect, they would not have changed a thing. They feel the addition of their Downs Syndrome child changed their lives for the better.

     
  2. The Nazis used to kill the retarded (along with Jews, gypsies, etc. etc. etc.), in the name of eugenics — improving the precious Aryan gene-pool. Today’s pro-abort Left don’t even have eugenics as an excuse. They are death cultists, pure and simple, ready and eager to consign Down’s Syndrome pre-born and children to death. If intelligence is the be all and end all that determines who lives, who dies, the pro-aborts better be careful because one never knows when the IQ bar is set at a higher level to include the Left.

     
    • Leftists are just fascists with better public relations, of course.

      Pol Pot included anyone smart enough to earn a college degree (except of course his Sorbonne buddies) on the death list for “social justice,” of course.

       
      • Thank you, Anon, for the reminder!

        Indeed, in its 3-year reign of terror, the Khmer Rouge targeted any Cambodian who wore glasses or had a pen in his pocket or looked remotely like they’re an “intellectual” (which means educated) for execution.

        In China, Mao Zedong also targeted intellectuals for abuse and extermination. One notorious campaign in the late 1950s followed the infamous Hundred Flowers Campaign when Mao invited China’s intellectuals to tell him what they thought of the glorious accomplishments of the Chinese Communist Party since 1949. But instead of the expected acclaim and praise, the intellectuals actually believed Mao and told him the truth — that the CCP had become another dictatorship, like the ones that the Communist Revolution supposedly had toppled. Ever the malignant narcissist, Mao reacted with rage and declared war on the intellectuals, complaining bitterly than “instead of a hundred flowers blooming in the socialist garden, I got only weeds.”

        And we all know what gardeners do to weeds!

         
  3. I have an email friend who has a Down’s Syndrome child, she is the delight of his life. I have always felt that it is these little ones who will enter heaven immediately because of their innocence and joy. I would trust one of these precious little ones to the scums in politics who want to get rid of them!

     
  4. I wonder how her friend feels after reading this article about her and her child. She has taken something so personal and private and held it up for fodder in the name of “journalism”, a term I use loosely and without the implication of actual journalistic integrity. I have to wonder if suddenly her friend questions how long she has felt so antagonistic towards the child who she has loved and protected all these years.

    The fabric of our society has become so frayed and tattered that we are willing to throw away anything that is imperfect – even if that imperfection houses a human soul and a beating heart. It is absolutely shameful.

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *