Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Last Children of Down Syndrome

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 142 posts

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#61

Post by drno123 »

Tronno wrote: post #36
michaelsbradley wrote: post #2

Special attention must be given to evaluating the morality of prenatal diagnostic techniques which enable the early detection of possible anomalies in the unborn child. In view of the complexity of these techniques, an accurate and systematic moral judgment is necessary. When they do not involve disproportionate risks for the child and the mother, and are meant to make possible early therapy or even to favour a seren…

This may be controversial, but I don't believe an unborn fetus has any inherent value outside of whatever feelings of hope and excitement it elicits in the parents. If those feelings are instead of dread and anguish, it should be terminated for the benefit of all. The quote seems to imply there is value in the suffering of a disabled child and its parents - suffering for its own sake - which is absolutely horrific.

And yet, people with Down’s syndrome are more happy than average person, so we cannot say that they suffer, and aborting baby with Down’s syndrome does not prevent baby suffering. I know that people with Down’s are more susceptible to certain illnesses but even with that they are happy. Source: my sister worked with peoplw with Downs.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#62

Post by Fumtumi »

duxup wrote: post #21
chmod775 wrote: post #8

Prenatal testing is one of the few solutions to this "post-darwinian" world (not in the usual sense of the word) with its modern medicine that will result in mankind accumulating more and more genetic defects. Though slightly more ethical from my point of view would be gene-editing to remove those defects, instead of just terminating the fetus. Edit: Also I'm not talking about down syndrome specifically. There's a lo…

It's hard to imagine any kinda of gene editing doesn't inevitably lead to Gattaca type situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP1cCjBkWZU The doctor's "best of you" argument ... it's hard for that not to be appealing.

I would be glad.

It doesn't make me special or a more valuable individual that i have sleeping issues and nerve issues.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#63

Post by highland586 »

andrepd wrote: post #27
michaelsbradley wrote: post #2

Special attention must be given to evaluating the morality of prenatal diagnostic techniques which enable the early detection of possible anomalies in the unborn child. In view of the complexity of these techniques, an accurate and systematic moral judgment is necessary. When they do not involve disproportionate risks for the child and the mother, and are meant to make possible early therapy or even to favour a seren…

It's a valid perspective, so I think the downvotes aren't in order. However I strongly disagree. Having Down syndrome isn't just being "outside the conventional parameters of of normality", it's a serious disease with life-altering implications. You will never surpass the cognitive capacity of a young child, you will have impaired vision and hearing, if you ever manage to speak at all, you will probably lose that abi…

While it is a serious condition, most of your statements are simply not true. Life expectancy for Down syndrome is around 55 - 60 years old. I have a family member with Down's who is around 60 years old at the moment and despite his health issues, he is one of the happiest individuals I know. Not saying this goes for all afflicted people, but a blanket statement like 'not a life worth living' is just plain BS.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#64

Post by bennettfeely »

They mention it in the article but we should really be calling this what it really is, 21st century eugenics.

It's not "changing who gets born and who doesn’t", it's killing the weak, the unwanted, the vulnerable.

It's saying that our lives have meaning and worth and dignity only so long as we are wanted and not a burden to others.

Few minds and opinions change on HN but I encourage anyone viewing this as a positive development of society to meet someone with down syndrome in person and ask if that person would be better off killed.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#66

Post by zbyte64 »

sgt101 wrote: post #47
renewiltord wrote: post #6

Hmm, so the testing isn't high sensitivity? It appears that the initial couple had the foetus tested and then did not abort but found that they had a child with Down Syndrome in the end. Interesting.

I think that there are two tests. First there is a non invasive test that can be done to evaluate if the foetus is "at risk" of Downs. Then there is a sampling one that is very specific. Basically counting the chromosomes. But the catch is that the specific test carries a risk to the pregnancy - so it's not applied without cause. As well as the sensitivity issue in the article there is also a specificity issue. My da…

I think part of it is if you want a genetic sample you have to puncture the amniotic sack, which can cause complications.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#67

Post by gadders »

bennettfeely wrote: post #64

They mention it in the article but we should really be calling this what it really is, 21st century eugenics. It's not "changing who gets born and who doesn’t", it's killing the weak, the unwanted, the vulnerable. It's saying that our lives have meaning and worth and dignity only so long as we are wanted and not a burden to others. Few minds and opinions change on HN but I encourage anyone viewing this as a positive…

Are you against abortion in general, or just for people with Downs?

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#68

Post by Fumtumi »

gadders wrote: post #25

I think there is a certain tension between on the one hand being against children being aborted for downs syndrome, but being OK with children with no detected abnormalities being aborted for lifestyle/career reasons.

At least not in germany.

Are extreme religous people okay with any abortion? Then there is no tension for them either and as far as i know, those are the more/real prominent examples of groups who saying something about this topic at all

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#69

Post by Fumtumi »

xupybd wrote: post #16
alangibson wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope I'm not following the argument, because it sounds like he thinks we should have other people around 'suffering with serious disabilities' so we can be reminded how precious life is. If so, that's cruel to the point of perversity.

It's saying that if we terminate base on a disability we are preventing that person from a chance a life based on the assumption that it would be better not to exist rather than have the disability in question. Those born with these disabilities might disagree and they might see such an action as a judgement against their own existence. This further adds to their suffering.

Only if you assume its relevant.

Its not relevant when your society defines abortion before 3 month okay, which plenty do and i agree with.

If we would see it different, than it would be murder.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#70

Post by mmastrac »

bennettfeely wrote: post #64

They mention it in the article but we should really be calling this what it really is, 21st century eugenics. It's not "changing who gets born and who doesn’t", it's killing the weak, the unwanted, the vulnerable. It's saying that our lives have meaning and worth and dignity only so long as we are wanted and not a burden to others. Few minds and opinions change on HN but I encourage anyone viewing this as a positive…

Consider the parent that you are forcing to raise a child that requires a significant amount of work. It's better to have wanted children. Unwanted children will suffer in different ways.
Post reply on HN