Down's blood test 'would cut risk of miscarriage'

[Deleted]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-33025227

What's your opinion on this? Obviously safer tests are welcoming but are you comfortable with a termination if said test revealed positive on Downs Syndrome and the parents requested it

[Independent voter]

I think I would be for terminating the pregnancy, combine that with whatever my wife was for.

That said, a lot of people seem to be happy with their downs child so I don't know. Sure would give you something to think about.

[Karadros]

...but are you comfortable with a termination if said test revealed positive on Downs Syndrome and the parents requested it

Absolutely. Others are free to think differently, but I think I'd be failing as a parent if I let my offspring be afflicted by such a problem.

[Vokal]

Nobody wants a child with downs.

Regular children are hard enough already.

[Dsonsion]

My opinion is that in these uncertain times, my offspring shouldn't depend on me to provide them with a certain degree of life quality for all their lives. I'd rather have healthy offspring that can lead a fulfilling life (not to say people with DS can't) with ease and without heavy and constant support from their relatives.
So I'd favour doing the test in early stages of pregnancy. Obviously, it wouldn't be my decision, as I'm a man and it wouldn't be me who is pregnant.

[Deleted]

I would be in favour of termination, yes.

[Thetruth1400]

My opinion is that in these uncertain times, my offspring should depend on me to provide them with a certain degree of life quality for all their lives. I'd rather have healthy offspring that can lead a fulfilling life (not to say people with DS can't) with ease and without heavy and constant support from their relatives.
So I'd favour doing the test in early stages of pregnancy. Obviously, it wouldn't be my decision, as I'm a man and it wouldn't be me who is pregnant.

Agreed. I'd much rather be able to test for genetic defects and terminate them instead of bearing a child that is going to be a burden on society for its entire life. I think that is fair not only to society, but to myself and wife as parents, who would be shackled with a very heavy burden just to preserve a life because society says that's what should be done.

While I do agree that it is a woman's right to her body, I also believe that a man should have say, as it is also his genetic contribution that made said life possible. If a man wants to terminate and a woman chooses not to, she should be free to keep the child, but the man should also have the freedom to walk away, non-responsible at that point if he so chooses. That would only be in situations where there is something wrong with the child yet the mother insists on keeping it against the fathers wishes. A perfectly healthy child, the man needs to take responsibility for his actions.

[Anonymous1038853]

I'm not personally comfortable with the prospect, as I feel that it borders on eugenics. Though as it stands, I don't really plan of having kids (and more likely to adopt, anyway). With that said, I do believe that giving the parents the right to test for this is the best option. Not only does it allow parents to better prepare if they decide to keep a child with a genetic disorder, but one also has to question what would happen in the absence of this capacity regarding parents who would opt to terminate. Though it's a rather grim sentiment, I personally believe it would be better to have a child aborted in the fetal stage than neglected or harmed after birth.

[Deleted]

Absolutely. Any serious developmental defect is a direct green light for abortion.

What's it like being perfect?

[Revi]

Yes. I completely support people in aborting it if it has Down's - as long as it's early in the pregnancy.

Having a kid with Down's syndrome is a tremendous burden. Yes, you'll love and cherish him. You'll also be responsible for him for the rest of your life, never get to see him grow up and create a life for himself. You'll never get grandchildren, and you'll probably be alive to see your child die. It's a 24-hours a day job with no light at the end of the tunnel.

I really don't take abortion lightly, but I'd want my partner to have one if I ever found out my child would have Down's or any other serious life-altering condition.

[draganid]

the problem with down's syndrome is that there are quite a few of them who are able to live pretty much normal lives but there are many others who require a lifetime of care. terminating a fetus with down's syndrome would be a really tough choice

[Abajaba]

Whew. Didn't take long for eugenics to make a come back in popularity.

Spare inconve-people from their life altering conditions, kill them before they have a chance.

[Fexus]

Whew. Didn't take long for eugenics to make a come back in popularity.

Spare inconve-people from their life altering conditions, kill them before they have a chance.

Fetuses aren't people. Terminating a pregnancy due to genetic defect is simply preventing a group of cells from developing into a person with that defect. Abortion in this scenario is clearly the most ethical choice.

[Abajaba]

Fetuses aren't people. Terminating a pregnancy due to genetic defect is simply preventing a group of cells from developing into a person with that defect. Abortion in this scenario is clearly the most ethical choice.

Glad you feel that way. I won't stop you from drawing arbitrary lines in the sand over when peopledom starts. I find our propensity for pretending that group of cells, that is no longer genetically either of the people that contributed to its formation, is somehow less a person for being the most basic stage of human development a little silly, but to each their own. Whatever helps you justify killing as being more ethical than sparing someone's life.

[Fexus]

Glad you feel that way. I won't stop you from drawing arbitrary lines in the sand over when peopledom starts. I find our propensity for pretending that group of cells, that is no longer genetically either of the people that contributed to its formation, is somehow less a person for being the most basic stage of human development a little silly, but to each their own. Whatever helps you justify killing as being more ethical than sparing someone's life.

If I chop off my finger is it a person?

[Triggered Fridgekin]

If I chop off my finger is it a person?

Maybe if they were body snatched like in The Thing, although definitely not a person.

[Kryctos]

Yes. I completely support people in aborting it if it has Down's - as long as it's early in the pregnancy.

Having a kid with Down's syndrome is a tremendous burden. Yes, you'll love and cherish him. You'll also be responsible for him for the rest of your life, never get to see him grow up and create a life for himself. You'll never get grandchildren, and you'll probably be alive to see your child die. It's a 24-hours a day job with no light at the end of the tunnel.

I really don't take abortion lightly, but I'd want my partner to have one if I ever found out my child would have Down's or any other serious life-altering condition.

Gosh you make me feel like if im worse than a DS child cause I won't have children or a successful life and I was actually born w/o any major defects >.>

[Abajaba]

If I chop off my finger is it a person?

Is your finger not genetically you? A fetus is a cluster of cells independent of the host or donor's genes. The moment the two zygotes fuse, that being, regardless of the concept of persondom arbitrarily affixed to it, is not you or your partner. It is the first stage of a new human being chronologically.

[Fexus]

Is your finger not genetically you? A fetus is a cluster of cells independent of the host or donor's genes. The moment the two zygotes fuse, that being, regardless of the concept of persondom arbitrarily affixed to it, is not you or your partner. It is the first stage of a new human being chronologically.

My finger is genetically me. It has my entire DNA. Yes it is the beginning stages of a member of the human species. It isn't a person though.

Imagine I had a machine that takes a skin cell and forms a clone from it. Let's say this process takes, I don't know, 9 months. Is my skin cell a person the instant I put it in the machine?

[Abajaba]

My finger is genetically me. It has my entire DNA. Yes it is the beginning stages of a member of the human species. It isn't a person though.

Imagine I had a machine that takes a skin cell and forms a clone from it. Let's say this process takes, I don't know, 9 months. Is my skin cell a person the instant I put it in the machine?

Your finger is not the beginning stages of human development. It is not an independently developing human.

Cloning is a unique case. You'll move to an attempted check mate scenario by sticking the DNA claim, ignoring other factors I initially left out as qualifiers. This will lead to accusations of shifting goal posts and hard lining on the "But my clone has my DNA!" end of the argument. I'd really prefer not getting dragged out into more elementary level debate on the issue, but I guess it's my fault for engaging in the first place. There's more to the first stages of our lives than being genetically separate from our parents, among them the first stages of consciousness that advocates of softballing fetus murdering with nicer words use as their primary argument.

I know I hold a minority opinion, especially since I hold it without religious motivation. There won't be much for me to say or do in a thread like this to make my case relatable. I just find it a shame that we've resorted to calling new human beings sacks of cells until they cross an arbitrary line we've drawn. It's a nasty precedent to set.

In the chronology of "you", you did not start at your consciousness. You begin the moment you are genetically dissimilar from your parentage. Earlier I used zygote incorrectly. Been too long, honestly can't say what word I thought I was going for there. At any rate, the moment you are a zygote and not an egg or sperm, you are you.