Abortion and Disability

You know that cleft lip varies greatly in severity, right? Especially when combined with a severe cleft palate. Even after surgery children are likely to experience feeding and potentially breathing problems, and struggle psychologically with never looking "normal."

It's probably also difficult to determine which disabilities wouldn't cause "enough" disability to come under the greater time limit, esp when severity can vary, so it probably has to be black and white healthy vs [even perceived as "slight"] defect.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Let's approach this from a different viewpoint then. From what you've said I think I'd be right in concluding that you think that a limit of beyond 24 weeks is acceptable for disabled foetuses. So surely the 24 week limit for healthy foetuses is wrong? Surely that should exactly the same as the disabled limit. Unless you think that the disabled limit is too far for a healthy foetus. In which case what are you saying?

I'm sorry but that's not a good enough argument to establish abortion as being acceptable beyond the time limit. It again goes back to what I was saying the criteria should be for very late abortions (in my opinion) would you consider euthanasia for an infant with a severe cleft lip, like you've described? Because if not what are you saying?

Late term abortiions for disability are legal on the grounds that essentially we have something that had it not been disabled it would be illegal to kill, but because it is it is acceptable. Now what I'm saying is that that law only makes sense if the same law carries through to neonates, that is its wrong to euthanise a healthy newborn, but that it's acceptable to euthanise a newborn with a severe disability.

That's not what I was saying, and I don't think what I wrote really suggested that either, I'd have preferred that if was unclear what I mean that you asked me to clarify it. I was saying that's where you frame the argument upon whether it's right or wrong. The question is are late term abortions acceptable for foetuses with these horrific conditions, the answer is yes if we have established that euthanasia would also be acceptable for born infants with such conditions. (Ignore where the law is at with it the law and morality are not mutually inclusive)

It would be a bit of a ridiculous stance to take to say that we should force the mother to give birth first before we end the life of her child for grounds of compassion towards the child.

I thought sex-selective abortions are illegal in the UK?

Disabled children are still your children.if you don't want a child that may happen to have a disability, don't plan on having any. You should love your children no matter what (this means not stopping their potential entrance to the world), otherwise you're a bad parent.

That said I definitely support full and extended help for parents with disabilities as I recognise how tough it is.

A slight red herring, it does exist primarily for foetuses with horrendous conditions that they're not going to live through and the life they do have will just be one of immense suffering for the brief perioid they are alive. That said the 40 week limit exists for things like a cleft lip as well.

What about people who simply aren't going to be able to cope with the needs of a baby with significant disabilities? Some parents aren't even able to look after healthy children properly.

There aren't enough adoptive parents anyway, and the number willing to take on disabled children is even lower, so adoption isn't the answer. There's also a severe shortage of foster carers.

At that point, you've got a situation where there's a child with low / no quality of life and no one who wants and is capable of taking care of it. In that case, I think abortion can be the least bad option for everyone.

My point is that a disabled baby is still a baby and it's not a right reason to disregard it because it isn't able bodied.

Low/no quality of life... its basic needs can still be met and it should still be loved and cared for, like any other child.

"I think abortion can be the least bad option for everyone". Hmm, okay, but what about the disabled child? They're having the chance of life taken away without them even having a say in it (hard because they're not even born, but still).

Do I think that there are lives that aren't worth living? Yes, I do. That's not because I think that disabled people shouldn't be valued, it's because I believe that quality of life is an important factor in these decisions. That's not disregarding the baby, it's being pragmatic about whether or not it would actually enjoy life.

I wouldn't abort a baby over something like a cleft lip / palate (except in the most severe cases), and to be honest I think you'd seriously struggle to find a doctor who would perform an abortion after the legal limit anyway. For 'normal' babies you'll seriously struggle to find a doctor who is willing to do it past ~16-20 weeks anyway.

Sure, I get your point about the quality of life. But disabled people can still be happy (I know you've not said they can't) and advances in technology could make their lives less painful.