Palin, Downs, and Roe

[HockeyMom]

Much is being made on a certain site about the above. The majority of the postings are praising how she decided to have that Downs child and how 80% of the Downs children are now aborted (their stats). They were saying how it were not for Roe all these "blessings" would be born. I would like to add my own views on this having had a cousin with Downs and have also worked with this population in Day Hab.

First let me say that just no two normal individuals are exactly the same, neither are Downs people. My cousin was born to a mother, my Aunt, when she was in her early 40s. This was back in the 1950's when amniocentesis was unknown and abortion was still illegal. My Aunt and Uncle also had son two years younger than Johnny. Generally, speaking Johnny was probably midrange Downs. He was generally able to perform moderate life skills tasks, but not to the point where he could be on his own. He could not take transportation alone or hold a menial job. His parents were faced with the choice when he was in his 20s and they were in their 60s whether or not to put him in a group home. It was becoming increasing difficult for them to take care of him at their ages. They decided against the group home, but hired a woman part time to come help him during the day. From what I learned that ate up just about all of their retirement savings, even with the extra money from Johnny's Social Security. To make a long story short, my Aunt passed away in her late 60s when Johnny was in his 20s. My uncle was left alone to care for Johnny until his own health started to fail when he reached his 70s. Both my uncle and Johnny were eventually put into nursing homes (separate). My uncle and Johnny passed away within a year of each other when they were 86 and 42. Are most people aware that Downs people can live to middle age?

I also worked with Downs people in Day Hab. This is where I saw Downs people higher functioning than my cousin. Quite literally some you would hardly even know they were Downs. Are these the Downs people that the anti choice are all talking about? I can tell you they are not the majority. Johnny would probably not even fit into that category. I saw a lot of them in Day Hab. Most were in their 30s and 40s and were wards of the state because their parents had long ago given them up. Nobody ever adopted them as children.

Then they were the extreme cases. Downs people with severe medical and developmental disabilities. This group is not what the average person thinks of when they think of Downs. Most were in their 40s, and yes, even 50s. These were the people who could not communicate at all. They could not feed, dress, or toilet themselves (diapers). Some were in wheelchairs. They needed constant round the clock care. None of them had families caring for them. As in the case of one woman in her early 50s, her parents were long dead. There was a letter in her file from her sister stating that she wanted nothing whatsoever to do with her. She emphatically state that she did not want to contacted regarding her sister unless it was about her death. It was all so sad.

I am very sorry if this is so long. The point I want to make with this for all those lamenting over 80% of Downs babies not being born, have you ever given any thought as to what will become of them? Are these parents having them prepared for a day when they themselves are old and can no longer care for them? How many others will be willing to adopt them? Will they have the means to? Or will all these 80% not being born become wards of the state and placed in group homes? These right to lifers like to talk about consequences all the time, but do they ever think of the consequences of how overturning Roe on just this issue alone will impact society?

This just riles me to no end when this subject comes up. Pallin just brings it to the foreground. She has a lot of money to care for this child. What about the average person who doesn't. How are they going to feel when they are in their 70s trying to take care for their 30 year old child? I have lived with this on different levels and saw real life. How many of THEM HAVE? The bottom line is the ONLY people who know if they can cope with this are the parents of these kids themselves. And it is NOT EASY.

[beachmom]

1. Thanks for your story. This is a difficult subject that nobody wants

to talk about. The other point is I think the first year is very vital for this baby, and it ends up that the Mother will be campaigning all over the country instead of focusing on him. I don't find that particularly pro-life or pro-family. From the video Palin's daughter was carrying the baby. Is it going to fall on her to care for him? Also, if the baby accompanies her everywhere, will he be exposed to viruses constantly due to the nature of travel/campaigning (I have read that all the reporters, staffers, and candidates end up all sick and passing it to each other on the planes)?

[still_one]

2. How can she justify the needs of her child by becoming the VP nominee? /nt

[CTyankee]

4. Let us not forget that as Dems we are pro choice which means that if it was Palin's choice

to have her Downs Syndrome baby, it is not for us to question.

If we can't leaveit at that, we are opening ourselves up to a big load of criticism for hypocrisy.

[Iris]

8. exactly. And to suggest that anyone who is pro-choice would terminate such pregnancy

is inaccurate as well. If 80% of these pregnancies are indeed terminated, it ain't just self-identified pro-choice folks doing it.

[CTyankee]

9. Proving Ellen Goodman's excellent point when she said that

people makes exceptions for abortion for 3 reasons "rape, incest and me."

[question everything]

3. There was a reverend interviewed on CNN during the convention

and he said that while he accept that life begins at conception, it does not end at birth. And he lamented the fact that once children are born, no political group cares enough to worry about their health, shelter, clothing, etc.

[jwirr]

5. And since we cannot tell through testing which group the child will be born into

do you suggest aborting all of them?

My daughter is not downs but she does fit into the last category. However, we live in Minnesota where we do not decide who is worth living. We also have services that make both the life of the child and the parents much easier than you describe. I have heard through service providers that Florida does not have these services.

For me what you are suggesting is clearly described in "War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create A Master Race" by Edwin Black. The book is the history of America prior to WWII and links our history to the German extermination of not only 6,000,000 Jews but also 4,000,000 more persons such as the disabled. Our nation had an attitude problem back then and I hope to God we have learned something since then.

I am sorry if I make you angry but I have spent a bit of time walking off my anger before I answered you. Attack the candidate but leave the child alone.

[HockeyMom]

6. My point is

It is nobody else's decision BUT the couple involved. I suppose you don't believe in choice. Choice goes both ways, but as far as these children, it has to be chosen FREELY with full knowledge of what the child and their future lives will be like. It cannot be sugar coated by people with a hidden agenda.

[jwirr]

7. Since I have had an abortion I would call myself pro-choice. What

I object to is the fact that you make their lives sound so terrible. I think it is more because they live in a state with no services for this group than their actual lives. I took care of my daughter for 45 years and I would do it again. She now is living with a foster family who love her and I visit whenever I want. Yes there still exists families like the girl who wanted nothing to do with her sister but that is part of the old shame idiocy that was part of the Edwin Black era. I am wondering how long ago that happened? Attitudes have changed so much here in Minnesota that I cannot believe that Florida could be that different.

[iverglas]

12. and may I just ask

And since we cannot tell through testing which group the child will be born into
do you suggest aborting all of them?

WHY DO YOU ASK?

Why do you ask someone WHO HAS NOT SUGGESTED ABORTING **ANY** PREGNANCY whether she would suggest aborting particular pregnancies?

If the author of the OP were my witness and you were opposing counsel, and you asked that question on cross-examination after she had just testified to what she wrote in that post, I'd be on my feet asking what I'm asking you now:

WHAT IS THE EVIDENTIARY BASIS FOR YOUR QUESTION?

Why are you asking a question that is obviously designed solely to make your target appear to have done something she has never done?

That last one, that's kinda rhetorical. I think everybody knows the answer.


For me what you are suggesting is clearly described in "War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create A Master Race" by Edwin Black.

You say so, do you?

For me, what you are sorely in need of is a class in reading comprehension.

Or ethics.


I am sorry if I make you angry but I have spent a bit of time walking off my anger before I answered you.

You don't make ME angry. You make me sick. I guess I'll just have to spend a bit of time combatting my gag reflex now.

[sittingonafence]

10. Agreed...

I, too, I have worked with special needs before and have a relative with Downs. I'm adamantly childfree (meaning that I never want children), and one of the reasons is because of how many kids/adults I've seen with disorders, syndromes and the like. Having a child with a condition is so much more common than people think! Working with special needs, I've seen many people in their late senior years still caring for an adult child. And no one likes to talk about the severe ends of the spectrums; autism and Downs, two of the most common conditions, are rarely show those with severe infliction, although there are many. The time, effort, and money that goes to these individuals is staggering. I love them, but I would never parent one.

I'm awfully worried at the thought of McCain/Palin behind the reins. I am not overly pro-abortion, but I want the option to be open. I would want that resource to be there incase I became pregnant, and for all the women who become pregnant and don't want a child. The idea of contraceptives, IUDs, or sterilization being illegal makes me ill. And getting rid of such things would take a horrible toll on the environment and economy. Think about it - a sudden increase in humans being brought onto the planet? All the recourses and money that will take.. phew. The current birth/death ratio is about 3:1, and we're in a tight spot.

It'll only get worse if these two make it.

(sigh)

[Iris]

11. what is "overly pro-abortion"?

There really are no "pro-abortion" people here.

[sittingonafence]

13. My bad.

I suppose by "overly pro-abortion", I meant that I wouldn't go to a rally for it or protest in its name, etc.

Forgive my terminology; unfortunately I was raised fundie/conservative and got smart enough to go the opposite direction. But some of the terms that you grow up hearing (pro-abortion vs pro-choice, the obvious example here) are harder to shake. My b. :}

[Iris]

14. no harm done!

welcome to DU!