Aborting a Down Syndrome Twin at full term.

ChippingSodbury

ChippingSodbury wrote: »

That's just ridiculous: how could you get Christmas bonus at Easter?

EXACTLY. I hate those pc liberals :mad::mad::mad::mad:

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yes. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02bgkjs

.

A family living on a traveller site in Central Bedfordshire say they are being threatened with violence after refusing to work 12 hour days for only 20 pounds.

Is it in that?

Brown Bomber

Jingle_Balls wrote: »

Except it's bollocks. It is legal to abort. It is not legal to murder the baby once it's been born.

So what happens to babies who survive an abortion?

Brown Bomber

bluewolf wrote: »

A family living on a traveller site in Central Bedfordshire say they are being threatened with violence after refusing to work 12 hour days for only 20 pounds.

Is it in that?

Is what in what?

Wossack

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So what happens to babies who survive an abortion?

theres an appeals form you can fill out for a refund

Grayson

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yes. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02bgkjs


No.
Nothing to apologise for.

That link brings me to a recording of a BBC Radio 3 counties show

Iain investigates...A family living on a traveller site in Central Bedfordshire say they are being threatened with violence after refusing to work 12 hour days for only 20 pounds.

Stop using nazi references. It demeans everyone involved in a discussion, especially you (And Hitler)

Ave Sodalis

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Is what in what?

That's what your link says

I'm calling bullcrap. Does anyone really believe it after a line like this?
"there is a possibility that the aborted downs syndrome twin will come out alive and they would have to kill him/her outside the womb."

Firstly, if it was aborted, it wouldn't come out alive. Secondly, that's murder and that just isn't going to happen.

ChippingSodbury

bluewolf wrote: »

EXACTLY. I hate those pc liberals :mad::mad::mad::mad:

The Easter Bunny brings the Easter Bonus, Santy brings the Christmas Bonus. Do I need to explain myself further Dougal?

Brown Bomber

Jingle_Balls wrote: »

What's 'close to full tern?' iirc, abortions are only legal up to 24 weeks, not full term.
.

You are wrong. There is no legal time limit in the UK on aborting probable down syndrome infants.


I already knew this. What I am trying to ascertain if it's standard operating procedure when a woman wants to keep one twin and abort the other to wait until the late-term on the pregnancy to minimise the harm from the abortion on the "healthy" twin.

Lemegeton

Packrat wrote: »

So here we get to it. Not only is it theoretically possible, but it's happened.

Now that wasn't so hard was it?

So these people were 'widely condemned' ? I take from your failure to mention it, that they weren't charged with or convicted of anything?

So it can and does happen without consequences. Thanks, that was all I needed to know.

just because something has happened in extreme cases, does not make it the norm. conorhal made the claim that the UK "allows" for post 24 week abortion for any minor abnormality. i was merely showing that to be the gross misrepresentation it was.

Brown Bomber

sup_dude wrote: »

That's what your link says

I'm calling bullcrap. Does anyone really believe it after a line like this?
"there is a possibility that the aborted downs syndrome twin will come out alive and they would have to kill him/her outside the womb."

Firstly, if it was aborted, it wouldn't come out alive. Secondly, that's murder and that just isn't going to happen.

You don't think watching on as a newborn infant dies following a failed abortion is tantamount to murder?

Ave Sodalis

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You don't think watching on as a newborn infant dies following a failed abortion is tantamount to murder?

Eh what? Maybe just read what I wrote again.

Mod

Brown Bomber, if your next post isn't one which contains *actual* links to back up your claims, I will see this thread as an attempt to troll and act accordingly.

Brown Bomber

Grayson wrote: »

That link brings me to a recording of a BBC Radio 3 counties show

I know, so try pressing play.

Ave Sodalis

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I know, so try pressing play.

But I don't want to listen to a family living on a traveller site. I want evidence that what you put in the OP actually happened.

BabysCoffee

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Yes. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02bgkjs


No.
Nothing to apologise for.

What do travellers have to do with twins with Down Syndrome?

Brown Bomber

Deleted User wrote: »

Mod

Brown Bomber, if your next post isn't one which contains *actual* links to back up your claims, I will see this thread as an attempt to troll and act accordingly.

Sometime between 30 and 90 minutes on this radio show http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02bgkjs


Before it will come an interview with a woman who now has a 6 month old baby born at 23 weeks, and you will hear a dad whose wife was offered an abortion at 8 months by the NHS because her baby was likely to be deaf.

BabysCoffee

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You are wrong. There is no legal time limit in the UK on aborting probable down syndrome infants.


I already knew this. What I am trying to ascertain if it's standard operating procedure when a woman wants to keep one twin and abort the other to wait until the late-term on the pregnancy to minimise the harm from the abortion on the "healthy" twin.

Your phrasing offends me. Surely they are infants with Down Syndrome?

Brown Bomber

BabysCoffee wrote: »

Your phrasing offends me. Surely they are infants with Down Syndrome?

As you please, no offense intended.

orubiru

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You don't think watching on as a newborn infant dies following a failed abortion is tantamount to murder?

It doesn't matter what anyone THINKS.

There is a REALITY to these kind of situations and you are willfully trying to avoid facing that.

You seem to have some weird ideas in your head regarding this and I'd like to figure them out.

Are you imagining that a woman goes to the doctors and 8 to 9 months pregnant, with twins, and she says "doc, I need you to abort the downs syndrome twin"...

The doc then says "sure, it's legal so OK"

The day of the procedure comes around and the downs twin is removed from the womb BUT it's alive. The kid is breathing on it's own, it's heart is beating, maybe it's crying at this point.

In you imagination, does the doctor then kill this kid? Again in your imagination, how does it happen?

Brown Bomber

orubiru wrote: »

It doesn't matter what anyone THINKS.

There is a REALITY to these kind of situations and you are willfully trying to avoid facing that.

You seem to have some weird ideas in your head regarding this and I'd like to figure them out.

Are you imagining that a woman goes to the doctors and 8 to 9 months pregnant, with twins, and she says "doc, I need you to abort the downs syndrome twin"...

The doc then says "sure, it's legal so OK"

The day of the procedure comes around and the downs twin is removed from the womb BUT it's alive. The kid is breathing on it's own, it's heart is beating, maybe it's crying at this point.

In you imagination, does the doctor then kill this kid? Again in your imagination, how does it happen?

The woman carrying twins gets screened, is informed that there is a high chance of birthing one infant with down syndrome. Doesn't want a child with downs so wants to have it aborted. NHS reccomends waiting until the pregnancy is in the late term to have the abortion as an it is safer for the child who they want to keep.

Bold = What I am trying to find out.

orubiru

Brown Bomber wrote: »

The woman carrying twins gets screened, is informed that there is a high chance of birthing one infant with down syndrome. Doesn't want a child with downs so wants to have it aborted. NHS reccomends waiting until the pregnancy is in the late term to have the abortion as an it is safer for the child who they want to keep.

Bold = What I am trying to find out.

Is there a link for that NHS recommendation?

I am pretty sure that the definition of "late term" is 20 to 24 weeks.

Ave Sodalis

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Sometime between 30 and 90 minutes on this radio show http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02bgkjs


Before it will come an interview with a woman who now has a 6 month old baby born at 23 weeks, and you will hear a dad whose wife was offered an abortion at 8 months by the NHS because her baby was likely to be deaf.

The only think I found was at 1hr 20 mins that was after a caller that said she had a child live at 23weeks, was an interview with a doctor saying that there's only 1/5 of a chance of survival at that stage.

seventeen sheep

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Sometime between 30 and 90 minutes on this radio show

Why should I listen through an hour of irrelevant chat and music and ads and crap, to find evidence of something that YOU'RE trying to back up?

If you want to make a point, YOU provide some sort of substantial back-up for it.

And, by the way, somebody giving anecdotal evidence to a radio show presenter doesn't exactly count as substantial back-up anyways.

RobertKK

Jingle_Balls wrote: »

I see the 'murdering a child' talk has already started.

Let's even it out.

It's terminating the viability of a parasitic organism

The DNA would link it to the mother, a parasite has no genetic link to the host.

eviltimeban

Looks like those clowns in congress did it again.

robocode

conorhal wrote: »

Oh, a residual shred of humanity I suppose?


And yes, for the record, you can kill a baby if it suffers any foetal abnormality (including something as simple as a hare lip) up to 9 months in the UK, which is pretty disgusting.

Oh now that's just absolute bollix

DesperateDan

Brown Bomber wrote: »

there is a possibility that the aborted downs syndrome twin will come out alive and they would have to kill him/her outside the womb.

How do they do it OP? I hear they put it in a blender and then make the other twin eat it.

eviltimeban

They could keep one in the attic and feed it fish heads.

Nodin

DesperateDan wrote: »

How do they do it OP? I hear they put it in a blender and then make the other twin eat it.

...all the while cackeling away....

Mark Tapley

bear1 wrote: »

I've re-read this a few times and I've spotted one or two things (in bold) which don't make sense.
The way this post has been written makes it sound like having DS is guaranteed to happen.
The next thing I spotted was the "potential" part. So according to this interview they are saying that DS is somewhat guaranteed but it isn't 100% for sure if the child has it?
Then if the abortion is too late they will allow it to be born and then execute it?
This isn't the 1400s OP and I think either you've made a mistake or the show you were listening to is radio version of Hostel.
There is a habit of the British complaining of everything to OFCOM (Top Gear for example) so I'd imagine the show you were listening to would have received quite a few complaints.
I call BS on this.
As for the morality of it, it is fcuking disgusting.
Case in point:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/11005285/Australian-couple-abandon-surrogate-twin-with-Downs-syndrome-but-keep-his-sister.html

Absolute scum.

I read your post once and noticed that you were talking shíte.
You say that the British complain to OFCOM about anything.
In the case of the Burma(slope) episode of Top Gear two people complained to OFCOM which means of course that the whole population are a bunch of moaning bastards.


http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-28522450

Lucy8080

Mod

Rightio, so I listened to it.

There's an interview with a lady who gave birth at 23 weeks to a perfectly formed baby and thinks that as a result the abortion limit should be lowered from 24 weeks.

Later on (at 1:40 mins) a man called the show to say that when his wife was five months pregnant is was discovered that the child may not be healthy. At each check up afterwards, he stated she was offered and recommended a termination. At 8 months, two weeks before her planned caesarean section, her consultant recommended that she should consider termination. He informed her that she would be induced and have to give birth and in the event that the baby was born breathing, they would hand the baby over to the consultant who would end its life.

There is no mention of terminating a twin with downs syndrome.

Edit to add:

Lucy8080 wrote: »

1hr 50 mins...a midwife (iirc) phones in to give her views, at 1 hr 54 a caller phones in to tell the story of d.s. twin.

worth starting at 1hr 50 and listen to both calls.

The One Doctor

Jingle_Balls wrote: »

What's 'close to full tern?' iirc, abortions are only legal up to 24 weeks, not full term.

Edit: ridiculous thread title, too. Nothing you've posted indicates that full term abortions are being offered.

Abortions have no time limit in the UK when the fetus may be mentally retarded.

bear1

Well OP, let's go through the link you've given. In particular the 30-90th minute window you gave us to spot your evidence.
Right well at the 30th minute mark there is the news.
At the 35th minute there is someone talking about languages and children in school.
At the 40th minute there is a song, New York Groove I think.
At the 50th there is chat about some lad that went to a daytime show whilst skipping work.
At the 55th minute there is another song, don't know the name of it.
I'm at the 1 hour mark and they are talking about the news again.
At the 65min mark there is some stupid Ghostbusters reference and Christmas.
At the 70th mark there is talk about the travellers.
At the 75th minute there is a traffic report.
At the 80th minute there is a presenter who keeps saying "Boyle is wrong".
At the 82nd minute it finally starts.
The child was born prematurely at 24 weeks and the doctors advised to have the child aborted as it was far too premature.
The woman refused and the child is now at the 36th week I believe.
The representative though says that only about 500 women a year terminate due to extreme premature birth and about half of those women do it due to a terminal illness.
At this point I will say that the representative is the most boring person to listen to.
At 84m and 25 seconds the presenter asks about the abortion at the last possible moment and the representative says that she knows no one who has actually done it.
At 85mins and 40sec the representative says that it can be possible to perform an abortion due to a serious illness. This is only if the child will have an incompatible life or if the life of the mother is put at risk.
At 88mins it just ends from what I could hear and closed the link.
The thread has been based purely on utter ****e, no offence OP but there is nothing in that interview where DS has been mentioned.

bear1

Mark Tapley wrote: »

I read your post once and noticed that you were talking shíte.
You say that the British complain to OFCOM about anything.
In the case of the Burma(slope) episode of Top Gear two people complained to OFCOM which means of course that the whole population are a bunch of moaning bastards.


http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-28522450

Good Lord, all that I wrote and all you can pick up on is that I mentioned the Brits complain to Ofcom a lot.
Well in touch with the thread aren't you.

Lucy8080

1hr 50 mins...a midwife (iirc) phones in to give her views, at 1 hr 54 a caller phones in to tell the story of d.s. twin.

worth starting at 1hr 50 and listen to both calls.

robman60

Jingle_Balls wrote: »

What's 'close to full tern?' iirc, abortions are only legal up to 24 weeks, not full term.

Edit: ridiculous thread title, too. Nothing you've posted indicates that full term abortions are being offered.

Actually, abortions are allowed to full term in the UK where the foetus has Down Syndrome or Spina Bifida under this 1990 Act I believe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Fertilisation_and_Embryology_Act_1990
Many of the MPs who voted in favour were unaware that the act contained this provision so there was controversy over it after the fact.

I think the case is the same in the US as a result of Doe v. Bolton (decided on the same day as Roe v. Wade), but states can impose limitations.

Maybe you should research a little better before dismissing what the OP said as ludicrous. Personally I think it's a disgusting practice. Even if only a small percentage of abortions occur this late, it's still horrible that it's allowed to happen.

conorhal

Deleted User wrote: »

Mod

Rightio, so I listened to it.

There's an interview with a lady who gave birth at 23 weeks to a perfectly formed baby and thinks that as a result the abortion limit should be lowered from 24 weeks.

Later on (at 1:40 mins) a man called the show to say that when his wife was five months pregnant is was discovered that the child may not be healthy. At each check up afterwards, he stated she was offered and recommended a termination. At 8 months, two weeks before her planned caesarean section, her consultant recommended that she should consider termination. He informed her that she would be induced and have to give birth and in the event that the baby was born breathing, they would hand the baby over to the consultant who would end its life.

There is no mention of terminating a twin with downs syndrome.

Oh, well that's alright so!

Infanticide is, it would seem, perfectly legal in the UK.

robman60

Deleted User wrote: »

Mod

Rightio, so I listened to it.

There's an interview with a lady who gave birth at 23 weeks to a perfectly formed baby and thinks that as a result the abortion limit should be lowered from 24 weeks.

Later on (at 1:40 mins) a man called the show to say that when his wife was five months pregnant is was discovered that the child may not be healthy. At each check up afterwards, he stated she was offered and recommended a termination. At 8 months, two weeks before her planned caesarean section, her consultant recommended that she should consider termination. He informed her that she would be induced and have to give birth and in the event that the baby was born breathing, they would hand the baby over to the consultant who would end its life.

There is no mention of terminating a twin with downs syndrome.

Isn't that even worse though? It's effectively saying infanticide is legal.

Mark Tapley

bear1 wrote: »

Good Lord, all that I wrote and all you can pick up on is that I mentioned the Brits complain to Ofcom a lot.
Well in touch with the thread aren't you.

As you yourself pointed out thread is a load of shíte. So excuse me if I don't give your post the plaudits it so obviously deserves. No harm I suppose throwing in an irrelevant gross generalisation.

bear1

Mark Tapley wrote: »

As you yourself pointed out thread is a load of shíte. So excuse me if I don't give your post the plaudits it so obviously deserves. No harm I suppose throwing in an irrelevant gross generalisation.

Fair point, hold my hands up. Removed that point.

robman60

robman60 wrote: »

Isn't that even worse though? It's effectively saying infanticide is legal.

That's not my opinion!!!

It's just my summary of the radio show!

robinph

conorhal wrote: »

Oh, well that's alright so!

Infanticide is, it would seem, perfectly legal in the UK.

That sounded more like an equivalent of "turning off the machines" than anything else. Just that in this case they never got round to putting the baby on life support because it wouldn't have made it anyway so they try and reduce it's suffering as much as posible.

kylith

robman60 wrote: »

Maybe you should research a little better before dismissing what the OP said as ludicrous. Personally I think it's a disgusting practice. Even if only a small percentage of abortions occur this late, it's still horrible that it's allowed to happen.

Unfortunately some abnormalities can only be detected late in the pregnancy. Wouldn't it be more horrible to force a woman to have a child only to watch it die a short time later? Or to force her to rear a child who will have a miserable life, plagued with serious medical issues and pain?

PopePalpatine

kylith wrote: »

Unfortunately some abnormalities can only be detected late in the pregnancy. Wouldn't it be more horrible to force a woman to have a child only to watch it die a short time later? Or to force her to rear a child who will have a miserable life, plagued with serious medical issues and pain?

Don't you know that women are emotionless baby-making machines? :rolleyes:

Macavity.

urbanledge wrote: »

each to their own,
whats it got to do with you?

Jesus, if we all had this attitude it would make the forum pretty redundant.

kylith

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Don't you know that women are emotionless baby-making machines? :rolleyes:

See what happens when I get out of the kitchen? I get all kinds of mad ideas about women not being brood mares with no say about their bodies.

robman60

Deleted User wrote: »

That's not my opinion!!!

It's just my summary of the radio show!

I realise that, and I didn't intend my post to seem like a response to you personally. People took your point as an end of discussion to some degree, but your post raised the harrowing point of potential infanticide.

kylith wrote: »

Unfortunately some abnormalities can only be detected late in the pregnancy. Wouldn't it be more horrible to force a woman to have a child only to watch it die a short time later? Or to force her to rear a child who will have a miserable life, plagued with serious medical issues and pain?

I'm aware that many of these conditions are only detected at the 20 week scan. Believe me, I am not cold-hearted and I realise that the women (and men, for that matter) at the centre of these cases are left in a terrible predicament. However, I think that permitting abortion until birth, even in these cases is equal to infanticide and that is something I could never condone.

As far as I know Down Syndrome sufferers have pretty decent life expectancy and many enjoy a good quality of life. I don't think the fact you will most likely face a more difficult life gives your parents the right to end your life.

Brown Bomber

seventeen sheep wrote: »

Why should I listen through an hour of irrelevant chat and music and ads and crap, to find evidence of something that YOU'RE trying to back up?

If you want to make a point, YOU provide some sort of substantial back-up for it.

And, by the way, somebody giving anecdotal evidence to a radio show presenter doesn't exactly count as substantial back-up anyways.

You see what you've done here? When I said "is this the case?" you read it as me saying "this is the case!"


Now that we've cleared up your little error do you actually know if this is the case? Do you even care ? I do, which is why I am trying to find out the truth.

Brown Bomber

Lucy8080 wrote: »

1hr 50 mins...a midwife (iirc) phones in to give her views, at 1 hr 54 a caller phones in to tell the story of d.s. twin.

worth starting at 1hr 50 and listen to both calls.

Thank you so much for making the effort. It's rather telling that nobody thanked your post for finding something that was there but others multithanked a post that couldn't find something that was there don't you think?