Is it also important to tell the story of raising a child with down syndrome? Or since neither of you likely don't know any, is this strictly ideological?
Not strictly ideological. I’ve worked in the developmental disabilities field for 27 years. I know and am friends with many people with Downs Syndrome.
Over 30 years ago, my mom's co-worker received results from an amniocentesis allegedly showing her baby had down syndrome. The medical staff tried pressuring her to abort, but she refused and prepared to welcome a special needs child. The baby was born WITHOUT down syndrome.
All of these depraved cultures are dying. If they didn't ransack the developing world for fresh bodies, France and England and every other atheist tomb of a culture would be naturally purged from the earth in an historic blink of an eye. The fertility of such death-generating people approaches zero over time.
If you want to tell the story of abortion and Down's Syndrome you also have to address the very, very high rate of paternal abandonment of children with disabilities. A punitive laser focus on women and how they need to step up is *part of the problem*, not part of the solution.
Ads that say: "women -- we are watching you. If you don't do all the supportive loving we are going to demand of you in exactly the right way, we are going to POUNCE on you for you heartless ableism" is actually going to increase the incidence of abortion, no matter how good it feels to entitled moralists who hate women.
You don't know much about this issue, and you don't actually care much, either.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Paternal abandonment is wrong, and so is abortion. Are you upset that the American Dental Association doesn't treat pancreatitis? They are different issues and both should be addressed. I see what you're saying, and where you're coming from, but please remove the emotion and debate the argument instead of making ad hominem attacks.
They really are not different issues. These ads that show footage of adorable babies and kids are not addressing any of the real considerations a sensible, loving woman has about being the primary caregiver -- and very often the ONLY real caregiver -- for someone with a disability. That's a commitment that lasts into adulthood, and supports for adults with disabilities are *terrible*. The rate of paternal abandonment is very very high across childhood, which lasts 18 years (18 years in which many dads walk out -- *more often* on children with disabilities). Messaging the bottom line of which is: you are a *terrible person* if you don't *care enough* -- directed at women who are too often the ONLY caregivers of children, even more so for children with disabilities, EVEN MORE SO for dependent adults with disabilities who don't even figure in these kinds of ads...
you know what the effect is? The effect is to *increase* screening and abortion. Do you want moms to not be afraid to have a child with a disability? Pre-loading extra guilt is a stupid, meanspirited approach. Making sure they know they will have help and support would be good. Messaging to MEN and FATHERS that *they* need to care would be good. Getting involved with policy-making to ensure the lives of disabled adults are obviously perfectly okay (right now, the stats demonstrate that very often they are not perfectly okay) would be good. Aiming extra guilt at pregnant women? Stupid, mean, counter-productive, entitled, misogynist.
I agree with the idea that fathers and institutions should be pushed for more responsibility. Because too often they take none. But there are women in stable relationships with responsible husbands and extended families who still fear having a baby with a Down's syndrome. Especially women in countries where this syndrome is almost eradicated by the means of abortion. I'm one of such. I've never met a person with Down's. Frankly, I haven't even seen one for years. Because of that my imagination paints a really dark picture, and of course I'm scared to the point I'd consider killing my own baby. It's not guilt tripping, it's encouraging. Said that, I'm all for same style adds for fathers. And for political push towards helpful levels of institutional involvement.
You know what, I completely agree with you. As “pro men” as I am and I am so not a feminist, they really do need to step up across the board as men and fathers.
You bring up very good, real world points. My mom is so caring for my 2 adult siblings one with autism and the other with a disability. She was single much of that time without any support from our Dad. She's now in her 70s and is exhausted. I'm expecting you care for my sister after my mom passes away. My mom would never have chosen abortion if she knew her children's disabilities, but it doesn't take away how much she struggled, fought for help, and sacrificed to care for them. Something needs to be done for situations like these if we want to lessen abortions due to the fear for the ability to care fordisabled kids. I think the solution lies with community and government laws and assistance. However, it's scary to think that society is in a precursor to a "The Giver" situation where we eliminate potentially inconvenient people.
Sorry, but two wrongs don’t make a right completely inapplicable to the situation. That’s a comparing apples to orange and Kathleen raised a very important point.
The truth is most women are abandoned when there is a child with a birth defect, major disability
And it’s completely unfair to expect that woman to raise a child alone, without support, and without any governmental support while the father just dashes off
While I understand your argument, it’s completely tone deaf to the reality of what’s really happening
You’re right. When the going gets tough these dads get a new family. That happens a lot. It happens a lot when mom gets sick, too. Unless they want to address ALL of the social issues involved here then they are only telling partial truths.
Exactly this. When women who are married are diagnosed with cancer, 70% end up being abandoned by their husbands… The husband’s file for divorce because they don’t want to take care of a sick wife. And that’s because their wife appliance is broken.
To your point until society addresses all of the truths, addressing only one truth is partial and dangerous
I have heard studies say that cancer can decrease divorce, has no effect or increases. However the ones that say increase never cite above 30%. Where did you hear 70%?
Incidentally there's also this report that the biggest men-divorce-sick-wives paper got retracted. It lowered it down to 6% increase in divorce, which is not 6% more divorces but a 6% increase over the normal rate.
[“To our horror”: Widely reported study suggesting divorce is more likely when wives fall ill gets axed]
"A widely reported finding that the risk of divorce increases when wives fall ill — but not when men do — is invalid, thanks to a short string of mistaken coding that negates the original conclusions, published in the March issue of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior.
[...]
People who left the study were actually miscoded as getting divorced.
[...]
They found that marriages were 6% more likely to end if the wife falls seriously ill than if she’s healthy, while the same was not true when the husband fell ill.
History is written by the winners, and the disabled will never be the winners.
Useful factoid: in UK law, the crime of killing a pregnant woman with a "viable fetus" is still called murder and "child destruction".
"Viable fetus" is defined in UK as 22 weeks, or 5 months. So in our current law, a fetus becomes a child at 22 weeks because this is the legal point it can be murdered as a human being.
This is truly heartbreaking. I have a sister with Down Syndrome, and she isn’t even able she to do most of the things that people with Down Syndrome can do. Still, she is such a joy and treasure, the greatest blessing to our family. It’s horrific to think how so many like her are being killed. Thank you for sharing.
It's a total hypocritical joke. The EU requires by law cigarettes come with pictures of rotting gums and mangled teeth to show the potential consequences of their actions:
They aren’t worried about the feelings of post abortive mothers, they’re worried that women might be persuaded to choose life in the face of a DS diagnosis. What welfare state wants citizens that use more resources than they provide? Meanwhile, resources for those with DS will continue to dry up eventually setting back any and all progress for individuals in that community and making institutions necessary evils again.
I haven’t read this news yet, so I am assuming that the government of France wants to euthanize children with “Down” syndrome; Am I near the target ?🎯……..Please respond to me if I am correct ✅. Thank you!
Thanks for your work in highlighting these issues. It is a terrible evil which would demean and destroy human life in the name of 'rights' and 'progress'. Only in the Christian faith is there a way out of this moral morasse.
It’s important to tell the story of abortion and Down’s Syndrome. Thanks.
I agree--thank you!
Is it also important to tell the story of raising a child with down syndrome? Or since neither of you likely don't know any, is this strictly ideological?
Not strictly ideological. I’ve worked in the developmental disabilities field for 27 years. I know and am friends with many people with Downs Syndrome.
So, if Aborting a 15-week-old baby isn't death, what is it?
But then, France did make a spectacle out of la guillotine.
Once great Christian nations have devolved into demon-worshipping countries.
Also true
Over 30 years ago, my mom's co-worker received results from an amniocentesis allegedly showing her baby had down syndrome. The medical staff tried pressuring her to abort, but she refused and prepared to welcome a special needs child. The baby was born WITHOUT down syndrome.
As the mother of a wonderful 17 year old son with Down syndrome, this breaks my heart.
All of these depraved cultures are dying. If they didn't ransack the developing world for fresh bodies, France and England and every other atheist tomb of a culture would be naturally purged from the earth in an historic blink of an eye. The fertility of such death-generating people approaches zero over time.
I was wracking my brain to come up with this comment and then there it was! THANKYOU
If you want to tell the story of abortion and Down's Syndrome you also have to address the very, very high rate of paternal abandonment of children with disabilities. A punitive laser focus on women and how they need to step up is *part of the problem*, not part of the solution.
Ads that say: "women -- we are watching you. If you don't do all the supportive loving we are going to demand of you in exactly the right way, we are going to POUNCE on you for you heartless ableism" is actually going to increase the incidence of abortion, no matter how good it feels to entitled moralists who hate women.
You don't know much about this issue, and you don't actually care much, either.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Paternal abandonment is wrong, and so is abortion. Are you upset that the American Dental Association doesn't treat pancreatitis? They are different issues and both should be addressed. I see what you're saying, and where you're coming from, but please remove the emotion and debate the argument instead of making ad hominem attacks.
They really are not different issues. These ads that show footage of adorable babies and kids are not addressing any of the real considerations a sensible, loving woman has about being the primary caregiver -- and very often the ONLY real caregiver -- for someone with a disability. That's a commitment that lasts into adulthood, and supports for adults with disabilities are *terrible*. The rate of paternal abandonment is very very high across childhood, which lasts 18 years (18 years in which many dads walk out -- *more often* on children with disabilities). Messaging the bottom line of which is: you are a *terrible person* if you don't *care enough* -- directed at women who are too often the ONLY caregivers of children, even more so for children with disabilities, EVEN MORE SO for dependent adults with disabilities who don't even figure in these kinds of ads...
you know what the effect is? The effect is to *increase* screening and abortion. Do you want moms to not be afraid to have a child with a disability? Pre-loading extra guilt is a stupid, meanspirited approach. Making sure they know they will have help and support would be good. Messaging to MEN and FATHERS that *they* need to care would be good. Getting involved with policy-making to ensure the lives of disabled adults are obviously perfectly okay (right now, the stats demonstrate that very often they are not perfectly okay) would be good. Aiming extra guilt at pregnant women? Stupid, mean, counter-productive, entitled, misogynist.
I agree with the idea that fathers and institutions should be pushed for more responsibility. Because too often they take none. But there are women in stable relationships with responsible husbands and extended families who still fear having a baby with a Down's syndrome. Especially women in countries where this syndrome is almost eradicated by the means of abortion. I'm one of such. I've never met a person with Down's. Frankly, I haven't even seen one for years. Because of that my imagination paints a really dark picture, and of course I'm scared to the point I'd consider killing my own baby. It's not guilt tripping, it's encouraging. Said that, I'm all for same style adds for fathers. And for political push towards helpful levels of institutional involvement.
You know what, I completely agree with you. As “pro men” as I am and I am so not a feminist, they really do need to step up across the board as men and fathers.
You bring up very good, real world points. My mom is so caring for my 2 adult siblings one with autism and the other with a disability. She was single much of that time without any support from our Dad. She's now in her 70s and is exhausted. I'm expecting you care for my sister after my mom passes away. My mom would never have chosen abortion if she knew her children's disabilities, but it doesn't take away how much she struggled, fought for help, and sacrificed to care for them. Something needs to be done for situations like these if we want to lessen abortions due to the fear for the ability to care fordisabled kids. I think the solution lies with community and government laws and assistance. However, it's scary to think that society is in a precursor to a "The Giver" situation where we eliminate potentially inconvenient people.
*I'm expecting to care
Sorry, but two wrongs don’t make a right completely inapplicable to the situation. That’s a comparing apples to orange and Kathleen raised a very important point.
The truth is most women are abandoned when there is a child with a birth defect, major disability
And it’s completely unfair to expect that woman to raise a child alone, without support, and without any governmental support while the father just dashes off
While I understand your argument, it’s completely tone deaf to the reality of what’s really happening
You’re right. When the going gets tough these dads get a new family. That happens a lot. It happens a lot when mom gets sick, too. Unless they want to address ALL of the social issues involved here then they are only telling partial truths.
Exactly this. When women who are married are diagnosed with cancer, 70% end up being abandoned by their husbands… The husband’s file for divorce because they don’t want to take care of a sick wife. And that’s because their wife appliance is broken.
To your point until society addresses all of the truths, addressing only one truth is partial and dangerous
I have heard studies say that cancer can decrease divorce, has no effect or increases. However the ones that say increase never cite above 30%. Where did you hear 70%?
Incidentally there's also this report that the biggest men-divorce-sick-wives paper got retracted. It lowered it down to 6% increase in divorce, which is not 6% more divorces but a 6% increase over the normal rate.
[“To our horror”: Widely reported study suggesting divorce is more likely when wives fall ill gets axed]
"A widely reported finding that the risk of divorce increases when wives fall ill — but not when men do — is invalid, thanks to a short string of mistaken coding that negates the original conclusions, published in the March issue of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior.
[...]
People who left the study were actually miscoded as getting divorced.
[...]
They found that marriages were 6% more likely to end if the wife falls seriously ill than if she’s healthy, while the same was not true when the husband fell ill.
"
https://retractionwatch.com/2015/07/21/to-our-horror-widely-reported-study-suggesting-divorce-is-more-likely-when-wives-fall-ill-gets-axed/
Brilliant reply to the BS
Wonder if the French remember that one of their presidents had a daughter with Down Syndrome and was completely devoted to her.
www.catholicworldreport.com/2017/04/26/a-fathers-love-the-story-of-charles-and-anne/
History is written by the winners, and the disabled will never be the winners.
Useful factoid: in UK law, the crime of killing a pregnant woman with a "viable fetus" is still called murder and "child destruction".
"Viable fetus" is defined in UK as 22 weeks, or 5 months. So in our current law, a fetus becomes a child at 22 weeks because this is the legal point it can be murdered as a human being.
Venerable Servant of God Jerome Lejeune, pray for us, pray for France.
https://www.research.fondationlejeune.org/who-was-jerome-lejeune/
This is truly heartbreaking. I have a sister with Down Syndrome, and she isn’t even able she to do most of the things that people with Down Syndrome can do. Still, she is such a joy and treasure, the greatest blessing to our family. It’s horrific to think how so many like her are being killed. Thank you for sharing.
It's a total hypocritical joke. The EU requires by law cigarettes come with pictures of rotting gums and mangled teeth to show the potential consequences of their actions:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ%3AJOL_2014_360_R_0007
Yet when there's a tame ad about a Down's person who wasn't aborted people lose their minds.
They aren’t worried about the feelings of post abortive mothers, they’re worried that women might be persuaded to choose life in the face of a DS diagnosis. What welfare state wants citizens that use more resources than they provide? Meanwhile, resources for those with DS will continue to dry up eventually setting back any and all progress for individuals in that community and making institutions necessary evils again.
I haven’t read this news yet, so I am assuming that the government of France wants to euthanize children with “Down” syndrome; Am I near the target ?🎯……..Please respond to me if I am correct ✅. Thank you!
It isn’t, he exagerated the title to get easy clicks
This is pure insanity
Thanks for your work in highlighting these issues. It is a terrible evil which would demean and destroy human life in the name of 'rights' and 'progress'. Only in the Christian faith is there a way out of this moral morasse.
32 Fill up, then, the measure of the guilt of your fathers.
33 You serpents, you brood of vipers, how will you escape the sentence of hell? (Matthew 23:32, NASB)
🎯