[wtfCharlie]

(Original post by madders94)
No.

There is a big difference between aborting a severely disabled child, and one who will have a mental illness.

A severe enough mental illness can disable someone. My answer to the OP is no, but I can still see the argument.

[KJane]

Assuming that such a test was ever possible and could produce accurate results. No I wouldn't abort a child for schizophrenia, I'd probably be grateful that I could prepare for it rather than go through issues later on, plus if technology could ever do that kind of test, I'd hope they'd have developed treatments alongside it.

[Kiss]

No. Sounds too much like a 'Brave New World' scenario when you can just pick and choose a life before it occurs and the whole concept of a life becomes meaningless.

[animalnitrate]

No, I definitely would not abort

[TheSownRose]

(Original post by Pawsies)
No because my child might not even get it. Just because there's an 80% chance my child could have schizophrenia doesn't warrant abortion imo.

I could never abort a child, it'd bother me too much. I'd rather give up for adoption if necessary.

So ... out of sight, out of mind?

If you theoretically deemed potential schizophrenia as a good enough reason for you to not want to raise it, having it adopted wouldn't change anything. It would still have that 80% chance of schizophrenia, someone else would still have to deal with that.

[madders94]

(Original post by wtfCharlie)
A severe enough mental illness can disable someone. My answer to the OP is no, but I can still see the argument.

But it often won't show itself until early teens, and a mental illness like bipolar alone will not leave someone in a wheelchair unable to talk, walk, feed themselves, do anything independently or even smile. A person with a mental illness can have a life, with that level of severe disability it is just an existence.

[OU Student]

(Original post by madders94)
But it often won't show itself until early teens, and a mental illness like bipolar alone will not leave someone in a wheelchair unable to talk, walk, feed themselves, do anything independently or even smile. A person with a mental illness can have a life, with that level of severe disability it is just an existence.

Do you have experience of severe mental illness at all? I know someone whose wife has Bipolar. A few years ago, they had to decide whether she should go into a care home because of how ill she is.

[Bellissima]

i don't know... it's hard not being in the situation... right now i would say yes, probably.

[madders94]

(Original post by OU Student)
Do you have experience of severe mental illness at all? I know someone whose wife has Bipolar. A few years ago, they had to decide whether she should go into a care home because of how ill she is.

My dad has bipolar and PTSD and my mom has severe OCD and depression and although both are severely effected by it, not as much as my brother would have been had he survived, he had Pyruvate Dehydrogenase Deficiency and would never have been able to do any of those things I listed in my earlier post.

[headunderwater]

I suffer from psychosis myself and sometimes feel it would've been better if I hadn't have been born. I don't think I could bring myself to abort a baby, though, but that's more because I don't believe in abortion. I'd feel guilty to put them through so much suffering though, as psychosis is ****ing horrible. I'm terrified that I'll pass my psychosis on to my kids if I ever have them. I think I actually made the decision that I wouldn't have kids just in case, because it's just not fair on them.

[lightburns]

Yes. ONLY if it was before the baby was conscious etc. I would never advocate killing people who are already people. However, in a pre-conscious phase, only completely healthy potential babies should be chosen to be allowed to become babies. Remember that a single child with a condition could end up passing it on hundreds of time, maybe more, down their generations; one slip, and you become responsible for suffering that is multiplied greatly from the thin slice that you yourself witness.

I fear that the number of negs I may get for saying this will be astronomical. But I think opinions should be shared, even if not many share that opinion.
I hold a more hard-line view in that I would support some amount of force being placed. For example, the mentally disabled mother who keeps popping out children only for them to be taken away, where they grow up to have mental problems and criminality - I would support sterilisation. The woman's right to reproduce does not trump a child's right to be brought into this world under reasonable conditions. Yes, I do personally know of cases like this. Another example would be that if it is possible to screen for condition X, that parents who are both carriers should be forced to screen and take the healthy embryo.

And before you say it, I practice what I preach. I have a condition which isn't even known to be genetic. But I won't take that risk, and have chosen to not have anything frozen whilst I take medication which will at some point make me infertile. I don't think that it should have been my choice to make, however.

[OU Student]

(Original post by lightburns)
Yes. ONLY if it was before the baby was conscious etc. I would never advocate killing people who are already people. However, in a pre-conscious phase, only completely healthy potential babies should be chosen to be allowed to become babies. Remember that a single child with a condition could end up passing it on hundreds of time, maybe more, down their generations; one slip, and you become responsible for suffering that is multiplied greatly from the thin slice that you yourself witness.

But they may not pass it on. Also, some conditions don't become apparent until
someone reaches a certain age. All you know is that they carry the gene. There have been cases where a child has been born with something and both parents are carriers. Until the baby was diagnosed, they weren't aware that they were carriers.

I had a condition which is genetic and at least 2 family members have it too. We didn't know until 8 years ago that the other 2 family members have it and that in our family it's genetic. They have both reacted differently to the condition - one has no problems at all and the other has a lot of problems as a result. There's no knowing as to how either would react to certain drugs and whether it could be successfully (I don't mean removing the affected part of the brain either) treated.

[fire2burn]

Short answer: No

Longer answer: No I would not. Ignoring the fact that I have no intentions of ever having children of course for the purposes of debate. People with mental illnesses can lead fulfilling lives. I myself have psychosis and it'd be a cold day in hell before I allowed someone to erase me from existence.

[lightburns]

(Original post by OU Student)
But they may not pass it on. Also, some conditions don't become apparent until
someone reaches a certain age. All you know is that they carry the gene. There have been cases where a child has been born with something and both parents are carriers. Until the baby was diagnosed, they weren't aware that they were carriers.

I had a condition which is genetic and at least 2 family members have it too. We didn't know until 8 years ago that the other 2 family members have it and that in our family it's genetic. They have both reacted differently to the condition - one has no problems at all and the other has a lot of problems as a result. There's no knowing as to how either would react to certain drugs and whether it could be successfully (I don't mean removing the affected part of the brain either) treated.

Before the embryo is conscious, it's not a person. Abort it and try again. If you don't know how it'll come out, don't take the risk.

Once a baby is born.. as I say, I would never, ever support anything against someone who has become conscious. There is a history of hush-hushing conditions, especially the mental ones. It's changing now, but slowly - you only need to see One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest to see how even the professionals viewed it - something to hide away. It was a point of shame for families. There is a quote I like from Stephen Fry, I don't remember it exactly, but it goes something like 'there shouldn't be a sense of shame about mental illness; there isn't shame when you go to hospital with a broken arm'.
The reason that I am saying this is to illustrate that I don't have anything against people with conditions - I'm not of the view that they (or rather, we) are any less worthy. After saying my eugenicsy type view, I'm worried that people could get the very wrong idea about where I'm coming from!

I just don't see a non-conscious embryo as a person, and don't think that it's worth the risk of potential suffering to the potential child and their potential descendent. The moral thing, in my opinion, is to try again. Potential human =/= human.

[Kerrias]

It's a really difficult choice and one I couldn't answer until I had been through that situation I think, I think whatever choice I made there would be times I would wonder if I made the right choice. If I aborted my baby I would have to live with that guilt for the rest of my life and I am sure there would be countless times I would think about my child and think about 'what if' and regret my choice. Likewise, if I didn't there would be times I would have to watch my child suffer which would be heartbreaking especially since I chose to bring him into the world and I would wonder had I done the most fair thing. I think I would have my child, love my child unconditionally and support them through whatever difficulties arises. But it is an extremely hard situation and I don't think there is a right or wrong answer.

[Id and Ego seek]

No, just no. Anyone who is remotely educated in what schizophrenia is and the biology, chemistry, and psychology behind it wouldn't consider this.

[Pawsies]

(Original post by TheSownRose)
So ... out of sight, out of mind?

If you theoretically deemed potential schizophrenia as a good enough reason for you to not want to raise it, having it adopted wouldn't change anything. It would still have that 80% chance of schizophrenia, someone else would still have to deal with that.

The words if necessary were included on the offchance I couldn't raise it myself.

[Dux_Helvetica]

I would not be opposed to getting an abortion but I guess it's the decision for the missus at the end of the day isn't it?

[Lydia1234]

Well no because pills can keep schizophrenia at bay

[z0tx]

It can't be determined at that stage. Yes genes are involved (in most cases), but environmental factors are just as decisive in the development of schizophrenia.