Bill to protect Down Syndrome babies presented to Missouri

[redleghunter]

Senator David Sater (R-Missouri) has submitted a bill that would bar abortions because of a prenatal diagnosis, test or screening indicating the potential of Down Syndrome in the unborn baby. Sater tells OneNewsNow he took his cue for the bill after seeing North Dakota and Ohio banning abortions because of Down Syndrome.

“Almost 90 percent of Down Syndrome children in the womb are being aborted right now .... I think that's a startling statistic, and I would like to see that decreased dramatically,” he says.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...ct-down-syndrome-babies-presented-to-Missouri

Are not such children the least of Christ's brethren?

 

[Uncle Siggy]

Senator David Sater (R-Missouri) has submitted a bill that would bar abortions because of a prenatal diagnosis, test or screening indicating the potential of Down Syndrome in the unborn baby. Sater tells OneNewsNow he took his cue for the bill after seeing North Dakota and Ohio banning abortions because of Down Syndrome.

“Almost 90 percent of Down Syndrome children in the womb are being aborted right now .... I think that's a startling statistic, and I would like to see that decreased dramatically,” he says.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...ct-down-syndrome-babies-presented-to-Missouri

Are not such children the least of Christ's brethren?

This bill wouldn't happen to be in response to the inaccuracy of the Prenatal Downs Syndrome test now would it???

 

[Winken]

This bill wouldn't happen to be in response to the inaccuracy of the Prenatal Downs Syndrome test now would it???

Thank God that the new test is far more accurate. Far more.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Senator David Sater (R-Missouri) has submitted a bill that would bar abortions because of a prenatal diagnosis, test or screening indicating the potential of Down Syndrome in the unborn baby. Sater tells OneNewsNow he took his cue for the bill after seeing North Dakota and Ohio banning abortions because of Down Syndrome.

“Almost 90 percent of Down Syndrome children in the womb are being aborted right now .... I think that's a startling statistic, and I would like to see that decreased dramatically,” he says.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-...ct-down-syndrome-babies-presented-to-Missouri

Are not such children the least of Christ's brethren?

I would have a problem if my child was down syndrome. I'm not sure I could abort.

 

[Winken]

The new study by Mary Norton and colleagues, by far the largest of its kind to date, involved almost 19,000 women at 35 locations in 6 different countries, all of whom were undergoing routine prenatal screening. The study compared the standard blood test, the “triple screen“, to a new cell-free DNA sequencing (cfDNA) test from Ariosa Diagnostics (recently acquired by Roche). All of the participants had both standard screening and DNA testing.

The potential for error is greatly decreased.
http://www.uptodate.com/contents/prenatal-screening-for-down-syndrome-using-cell-free-dna

 

[redleghunter]

This bill wouldn't happen to be in response to the inaccuracy of the Prenatal Downs Syndrome test now would it???

The invasive procedure? Could be. From the article it seems to be addressing eugenics mostly.

We know that in some Asian countries they conduct gender based abortions.

Had a Maj. who worked in my S3 shop. His son was Downs. No doubt the parents have a life long responsibility to see to their sons needs. However, the family was the most loving I encountered. When my son was sick they were the first couple to minister to us, actually do things we did not ask for.

Sometimes God's blessings come to us to appeal to our better angels. That kid and his family was a host of angels. God Bless them.

 

[redleghunter]

I would have a problem if my child was down syndrome. I'm not sure I could abort.

It's tough but all the families I know adjust. Of course they do because they love all their children.

 

[dgiharris]

Man, talk about a slippery slope argument.

Lets say you do an ultrasound at 11 weeks and the doctor reveals that your kid will have no arms and no legs.

Would it be wrong to abort?

What about brain damage?

What about genetic markers for serious illnesses?

I know, I know, battle lines are already drawn.

I think the crux of the argument resides on your views of the fetus.

If you believe life begins at conception you will feel one way, if you believe a fetus isn't a person until it is born you will feel a different way. If like the majority of us you are somewhere in between, then your feelings will be a sliding scale.

 

[Uncle Siggy]

 

[dgiharris]

I felt the exact same way about Bush/Cheney...

IMO, they were far worse than Obama and it's not even close

 

[joshua 1 9]

Man, talk about a slippery slope argument.

Lets say you do an ultrasound at 11 weeks and the doctor reveals that your kid will have no arms and no legs.

Would it be wrong to abort?

What about brain damage?

What about genetic markers for serious illnesses?

I know, I know, battle lines are already drawn.

I think the crux of the argument resides on your views of the fetus.

If you believe life begins at conception you will feel one way, if you believe a fetus isn't a person until it is born you will feel a different way. If like the majority of us you are somewhere in between, then your feelings will be a sliding scale.

Most everyone is going to have a genetic marker for something and you will end up having to abort everyone. Paul says all members of the Body are essential. You can not disqualify people because they do not seem as important. When it comes to downs syndrome though the question is who is going to take care of the baby. Because many downs syndrome babies do not ever become independent. They have to depend on someone to take care of them all their life.

 

[Thunder Peel]

I always want to see the unborn protected. I have a cousin with down syndrome and know that even children with disabilities have something great to offer the world.

 

[dgiharris]

Most everyone is going to have a genetic marker for something and you will end up having to abort everyone. Paul says all members of the Body are essential. You can not disqualify people because they do not seem as important. When it comes to downs syndrome though the question is who is going to take care of the baby. Because many downs syndrome babies do not ever become independent. They have to depend on someone to take care of them all their life.

This assumes that we are perfectionists and are going to abort for anything beyond a perfect child.

There is a big difference between have a marker for asthma and having a marker for Down Syndrome.

I think the first line would be drawn at competency and quality of life. There are genetic conditions in which a child will die a horrifically painful death inside of 5 or so years (like extreme brittle bones syndrome or something to that effect). There are conditions in which the person will never be independent.

I know, it's not a PC or popular thing to say, but there are real life considerations for why some parents may choose an abortion.

 

[Mayzoo]

I always want to see the unborn protected. I have a cousin with down syndrome and know that even children with disabilities have something great to offer the world.

When a child is cared for properly, they ALL have something awesome to contribute. When a child is neglected or abused, they struggle to simply survive. I tend to see more children with down syndrome being abused and neglected if something like this law comes into effect.

If the law prevents the parents from aborting the child, then once the child is born, resources to help the struggling parent (s) are few and far between. You may be able to force the parents to have a special needs child. You cannot force the parents to allow that child to thrive as it should. Many special needs children simply become a paycheck tied to an inconvenience for their parents--I know some of these too.

Not everyone can help a special needs child flourish. I have a special needs child. Hubby and I do all we can to help our kiddo thrive; however, some extended family simply are at a complete loss.

 

[redleghunter]

Did you miss the thread where Ted Bundy was discussed?

 

[redleghunter]

Man, talk about a slippery slope argument.

Lets say you do an ultrasound at 11 weeks and the doctor reveals that your kid will have no arms and no legs.

Would it be wrong to abort?

What about brain damage?

What about genetic markers for serious illnesses?

I know, I know, battle lines are already drawn.

I think the crux of the argument resides on your views of the fetus.

If you believe life begins at conception you will feel one way, if you believe a fetus isn't a person until it is born you will feel a different way. If like the majority of us you are somewhere in between, then your feelings will be a sliding scale.

It is tough.

At least 11 years ago a woman would get the sonogram at the 4th or 5th month depending on insurance.

Mind you the gynecologist gives worst case scenario if they see markers of birth defects. Here to tell you they were very pushy about what our "options" were. Really tee'd off the Mrs. which means I was too.

They went through a range of what ifs. Of course we got a second opinion as we were curious as to what accommodations we were looking at to care for our unborn son.

Second opinion was not enlightening as well. They did tell us all they could confirm was a clubbed foot and a potential for learning disability.

Wife gave birth to a healthy son with a clubbed foot. We had the foot corrected and junior is the fastest kid on the baseball team, great power bat a quite a middle infielder. He has a form of dyslexia which he gets help for but is doing well in school. He has to work harder than most but that builds character.

Still not happy with the original doc being pushy about options. I wonder how many women put in the emotional state my wife was in opted based on one opinion.

Disclaimer: no matter what we were going to have the kid.

 

[redleghunter]

Quite an appropriate response.

 

[redleghunter]

I always want to see the unborn protected. I have a cousin with down syndrome and know that even children with disabilities have something great to offer the world.

We know three families with at least one Downs child. Every time we visit with these kids I feel like I am entertainingly angels.

One family is so blessed with love they adopted a Downs child.

 

[joshua 1 9]

This assumes that we are perfectionists and are going to abort for anything beyond a perfect child.

There is a big difference between have a marker for asthma and having a marker for Down Syndrome.

I think the first line would be drawn at competency and quality of life. There are genetic conditions in which a child will die a horrifically painful death inside of 5 or so years (like extreme brittle bones syndrome or something to that effect). There are conditions in which the person will never be independent.

I know, it's not a PC or popular thing to say, but there are real life considerations for why some parents may choose an abortion.

I know a girl with brittle bone syndrome and I never once heard her regret that she was born.

 

[rambot]

And I'm sure the bill also provides comprehensive state support for families with down syndrome children right?