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

101–110 of 142 posts

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#101

Post by Damorian »

Fumtumi wrote: post #98
Damorian wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except those links are exactly my point. "Human" is a species of intelligent animals. "Person", is an entity typically associated with traits humans have. They are different things and the distinction is important. The purpose of your "dehumanizing" language is to detract from the "personhood" being debated.

Nope; I don't need to discuss the 'personhood'. I'm clearly fine with abortion before the 3th month. And no if you wanna have it clarified: I think a human being is more than just a small or big blob of cells My opinion did not change after we lost our 'fetus' in the 3th month. And no seeing a small body lying there was not a nice experience.

Given the grammar mistakes, I'm assuming English is not your first language, and you aren't properly understanding what I'm saying. It's fine if you don't want to engage, but if you are going to engage, please do so in good faith, seeking to understand the other person as completely as possible, particularly if you are working against a language barrier. I had assumed you were being disingenuous/willfully ignorant before, but I doubt that now, my apologies for making that assumption.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#103

Post by kwhitefoot »

LatteLazy wrote: post #86
gowld wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> meaningful quality of life factors. What are these?

That's the million dollar question here: is the Downs person's life worth more than the person (or people) they replace?

Not really. At the point when the decision should be made there is no Down's person only a potential person.

Here in Norway genetic counselling is offered if the mother to be is above a certain age (sorry can't remember the number). So my wife and I had sessions with a genetic counsellor who explained the statistics related to birth defects. The decision is of course entirely up to the mother to be, and her partner, the counsellor in my experience is very careful not to sensationalise anything and was very neutral.

The counselling and tests are provided early enough that an abortion can be provided at low risk to the mother and before the foetus is viable.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#104

Post by kwhitefoot »

GordonS wrote: post #72
mmastrac wrote: post #12

Having a child is terrifying enough. Some folks might be up for the challenge of supporting a child with special needs for their entire life (or a good chunk of it), but I'm not afraid to say that it was a huge relief to know that my son had no known genetic abnormalities before he was born. There's nothing to be ashamed of here.

I have a daughter with Down's (we didn't know during pregnancy - actually, we didn't find out until she was almost 2!!), and my wife got NIPT tests on subsequent pregnancies. I don't know what we'd have done had either of them been positive, but at the very least we wanted to know beforehand. Like you said, there's nothing to be ashamed of here.

That's astonishing. I think every mother over a certain age is offered a test here in Norway as a matter of course along with genetic counselling to make sure that she is able to make an informed decision once the result is known. This was the case for my children decades ago in Norway.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#106

Post by the8472 »

xupybd wrote: post #43
tristor wrote: post #14

> Yet a gulf seems to separate the publicly expressed attitudes and private decisions. I would be more surprised if this were not true. It's not very PC to say, but quite simply being different is not inherently a moral good. Downs Syndrome in particular is more controversial, because people who have this disorder typically are happy in their lives. I've spent a not insignificant part of my life working with teenager…

The difficulty I have with this is we are now actively choosing who gets to live and who doesn't. Yes it's at a very early stage of pregnancy but it may have a profound impact on the future of all human societies. The morality of such actions should be examined thoroughly. This is far from a cure to genetic diseases it is removal of diseased individuals from the population. Any selective removal can be dangerous. If…

> China's sex selective abortions [...] Nazi eugenics campaigns

Those are organizations in charge of the trolley lever. How about putting the would-be parents in charge and keeping the organizations out?

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#107

Post by Fumtumi »

Damorian wrote: post #101
Fumtumi wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope; I don't need to discuss the 'personhood'. I'm clearly fine with abortion before the 3th month. And no if you wanna have it clarified: I think a human being is more than just a small or big blob of cells My opinion did not change after we lost our 'fetus' in the 3th month. And no seeing a small body lying there was not a nice experience.

Given the grammar mistakes, I'm assuming English is not your first language, and you aren't properly understanding what I'm saying. It's fine if you don't want to engage, but if you are going to engage, please do so in good faith, seeking to understand the other person as completely as possible, particularly if you are working against a language barrier. I had assumed you were being disingenuous/willfully ignorant be…

You still can try to clarify what you are trying to say instead of being dismissive.

Let me try to reword it:

Yes it is a human fetus; Its not a human being.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#108

Post by jmcphers »

GordonS wrote: post #85
sgt101 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

There is a newer type of test, only very briefly mentioned in the article, and strangely not even by name: NIPT (Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing). It works by testing tiny amounts of the baby's DNA that can be found in the mother's blood. It is close to 100% effective for detecting Down's Syndrome. It needs only a blood sample, so carries no meaningful risk for mother or fetus, but it's more expensive than the older am…

This test is widely available in the US from e.g., Counsyl[1]. It's pretty amazing how many conditions they are able to check for with just a sample of the mother's blood; it's not just Down's but virtually any chromosomal abnormality. Our care provider strongly recommended it due to our risk factors.

https://prenatalscreening.com/

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#109

Post by GordonS »

kwhitefoot wrote: post #104
GordonS wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a daughter with Down's (we didn't know during pregnancy - actually, we didn't find out until she was almost 2!!), and my wife got NIPT tests on subsequent pregnancies. I don't know what we'd have done had either of them been positive, but at the very least we wanted to know beforehand. Like you said, there's nothing to be ashamed of here.

That's astonishing. I think every mother over a certain age is offered a test here in Norway as a matter of course along with genetic counselling to make sure that she is able to make an informed decision once the result is known. This was the case for my children decades ago in Norway.

Mothers in the UK get rough statistics based on their age (e.g. you're told you have a 1 in 8000 chance of having a kid with Down's), and have the option of an amnio, which is invasive and carries a risk of miscarriage, so many will go off the stats alone.

NIPT has only been around for a few years, whereas amnio has been available for decades AFAIK, so I guess it's amnio that's been commonly been available in Norway too?

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#110

Post by slumdev »

gambiting wrote: post #5
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…

Ah yes, the pope that as now comes to light has protected pedophiles in the church for decades. Really the authority we should all look up to.

I guess you're referring to the sham McCarrick report?

Getting thrown under the bus by the crowd who wrote it is a sure sign of sainthood.

Post reply on HN