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

111–120 of 142 posts

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#111

Post by GordonS »

mmastrac wrote: post #77
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.

> actually, we didn't find out until she was almost 2 I'm curious about this. I didn't realize that the condition could go undiagnosed long after birth!

It is very unusual. Most parents will find out during pregnancy, immediately after birth, or within a few weeks of birth.

In our case, somehow none of the health professionals noticed or said anything (yep, we seriously found out later that at least 3 of them suspected and said nothing - because it "wasn't within their remit"). Typical Down's facial features are not quite as prominent in our daughter, and developmentally, for a long time she tended to match her peers, or only lag behind a little. But coming on for 2 years, she still wasn't walking and her speech was lagging being, and we went to see a paediatrician - he recognised it immediately, and told us without even waiting on karyotyping. It was something of a shock :)

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#112

Post by Damorian »

Fumtumi wrote: post #107
Damorian wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There is a common theme among people who argue over abortion; they choose particular words that are either unscientific or misleading, in a disingenuous way, to promote their side as being more rational. My initial assumption is that you were doing this, and you may still be, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I feel it is very important that when we discuss abortion, we do so in a way that is scientific, rational, and consistent.

Your choice of words is particularly egregious, in my opinion. Killing is not the same as homicide. Human is not the same as person. A fetus is not a clump of cells, or a baby.

A "human being" is just a human (a common usage scientific term), and human is just a species of animal. So yes, a "human fetus" is a "human being". "Person" is a legal/philosophical term, not necessarily a scientific one. "Killing" simply refers to ending the life of a living thing. "Homicide" (the mention of which you removed?) is a legal term for killing a person. To drive this point home further, we have concepts for non-human persons, and non-person humans. They aren't interchangeable in all contexts.

The scientific reality and proper usage of the English language is abortion is killing humans (human fetuses). This is not up for debate. The debate is whether these humans are "persons", which entitles them to rights, or if they are not, if they deserve rights in some other capacity (e.g. my dog isn't a person but has rights).

Again, when people say "it's not killing" or "it's not a human", or tangentially, "it's a clump of cells" or "it's a baby" they are factually wrong and are deliberately misusing those words in an attempt to strengthen their argument, when in reality it makes them look either dishonest or ignorant.

To me, your posts are either dishonest, or ignorant. That was my entire point.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#113

Post by dogma1138 »

xupybd wrote: post #100
dogma1138 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t new, either nature took care of things in the past or people did... We’ve essentially only had a few decades when it was not possible to identify these conditions in the womb and society was able and willing to support these individuals and allow them to live on. Realistically in the past these children would’ve been killed by their parents either directly or through abandonment and those who weren’t often…

Yes some Greek societies left the weak babies to die from exposure others put their children on the alter in the hopes of better crop yields. Because it has been done in the past doesn't justify it now.

You don’t need to go that far throughout history, children with severe mental or physical disabilities didn’t live long even half a century ago even in most developed nations they would be abandoned and for those that weren’t society didn’t had the facilities to support them.

Down and autism today seems so much more common simply because these individuals get the chance to live to and through adulthood.

These conditions don’t only affect people’s mental abilities they have a plethora of other health issues too.

75% of people with Down syndrome that die die from respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses as they suffer from immune system issues and frequent inflammation, with the current pandemic a lot of them have died because if they do get infected they are severely affected.

https://err.ersjournals.com/content/26/143/160098

Before modern medicine and the flu jab many of them wouldn’t survive a harsh flu season...

Heck before we knew what Down syndrome was most of them probably perished as infants from infections that healthy individuals would just shrug off.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#114

Post by hi41 »

chub500 wrote: post #78

My parents were manipulated into having prenatal disability tests because of my mom's low amniotic fluid during my sister's pregnancy. Tests came back positive and the doctors recommended abortion. My parents were horrified, being pro-life. They endured a traumatic next few months and a premature delivery. That was 1989. My sister was fine but it left my parents with enduring resentment of doctors to this day. My abo…

I know of at least two families who got told by the doctor that they have to abort the fetus because if the Down syndrome test. Is there a financial benefit to the doctor? Why would they keep pressing on that? The baby was born okay.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#115

Post by gambiting »

slumdev wrote: post #110
gambiting wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have no idea who McCarrick is.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#116

Post by orwin »

Damorian wrote: post #112
Fumtumi wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There is a common theme among people who argue over abortion; they choose particular words that are either unscientific or misleading, in a disingenuous way, to promote their side as being more rational. My initial assumption is that you were doing this, and you may still be, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I feel it is very important that when we discuss abortion, we do so in a way that is scientific, ratio…

A human foetus w/o personality or any human trait, or a person that have a life to live and don't want to forcibly stay attached to that violonist for 9 months, i think i'm pretty okay with killing the foetus and everyone should be too.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#117

Post by Supermancho »

Damorian wrote: post #112
Fumtumi wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There is a common theme among people who argue over abortion; they choose particular words that are either unscientific or misleading, in a disingenuous way, to promote their side as being more rational. My initial assumption is that you were doing this, and you may still be, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I feel it is very important that when we discuss abortion, we do so in a way that is scientific, ratio…

> The scientific reality and proper usage of the English language is abortion is killing humans (human fetuses). This is not up for debate.

Killing and killing fetus is not a an equivalence in animal medicine.

https://www.merckvetmanual.com/reproductive-system/abortion-...

I do not subscribe to your belief that there is no debate, with that assertion.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#118

Post by orwin »

chub500 wrote: post #78

My parents were manipulated into having prenatal disability tests because of my mom's low amniotic fluid during my sister's pregnancy. Tests came back positive and the doctors recommended abortion. My parents were horrified, being pro-life. They endured a traumatic next few months and a premature delivery. That was 1989. My sister was fine but it left my parents with enduring resentment of doctors to this day. My abo…

Doesn't low amniotic fluid result in premature delivery in anycase? The doctor will try to help you make it to 35 weeks but its often not possible. Also if i remember correctly, Doctors try to add amniotic fluid during delivery to avoid complication for the mother and the children (else it can be bloody and infection-prone).

Also, maybe i agree on principle that abortion should be a terrible choice (i've have not thought this through yet), but a lot of my friends or close family are educators/youth counselors (i have been one myself in another life) and even with a big social security net (unlike the US), some lives are just so unbelievably sad i sometime think we should tests the parent before allowing them to have a child. I'm joking, but some days, not really.

To put the pro-life choice into perspective, of the 4 girls present in the "foyer" i was working at ten years ago (google translate give me reception center or youth club, its an orphanage for 11yo+), the only one still alive was blowing guys in the toilets since she was 12. At least she was proactive and asked money for it. The other 3 died, one suicide at 14, the other two "accident" between 17 and 19 yo (they did not leave a note). I only have new from one of the 30 guys i was trying to help at the time, he is still living in the street at 23yo, my mother just got him to do the paperwork to get a social security card and taught him how to use the formation center locals to cook for himself, so i guess he is making steps, but he was one of those we had hope for when he was 14, so knowing he is in the street since he is 18 make me feel like a failure.

I'm pretty sure nobody really wants to know those exist, know their past, their mothers, fathers or stepfathers, but still, they exist. I can't be pro-life when i've seen them suffer, seen them kill themselves, either literally or with drugs. Or not being able to live at all. I've seen a boy with no autism, aged 6, act like a 3yo around noon and bedtime and having a lot of issue with urinating and defecating (i was specialized 3-6). Asked the director why. If this kid manage to pass the mental trauma his father inflicted him, the physical damages will stay with him for the rest of his life. Some people should never, ever be parents. The killing of foetus is inconsequential until we've fixed how we take care of our children. Or maybe sterilizing people is the way to go.

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#119

Post by Damorian »

Supermancho wrote: post #117
Damorian wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a common theme among people who argue over abortion; they choose particular words that are either unscientific or misleading, in a disingenuous way, to promote their side as being more rational. My initial assumption is that you were doing this, and you may still be, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I feel it is very important that when we discuss abortion, we do so in a way that is scientific, ratio…

> The scientific reality and proper usage of the English language is abortion is killing humans (human fetuses). This is not up for debate. Killing and killing fetus is not a an equivalence in animal medicine. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/reproductive-system/abortion-... I do not subscribe to your belief that there is no debate, with that assertion.

To kill simply means to put a living thing to death. A fetus (human or otherwise) is a living thing. I don't know what the purpose of your link was, or how it has anything to do with the misuse of words above. Unless you think I'm implying that all forms of killing are the same, which obviously I'm not. That being said "killing fetus" is merely a subset of "killing " by basic logic. Were you implying otherwise by citing that link?

Re: The Last Children of Down Syndrome

#120

Post by e40 »

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…

that drains you emotionally, mentally, and physically

Also financially. The level of care required isn't something that all people can afford.

Post reply on HN