Uninformed Choice

Atwood at Here We Stand reports that the “choice” crowd in Illinois is now rallying to require a doctor’s referral to perform an ultrasound on a pregnancy. Why? The article he quotes explains it:

“We should be concerned about the long term health of the fetus,” Mulligan, who has voted against a ban on partial birth abortion, said.

Yup. Let’s protect the long term health of the fetus so they are good and healthy when we dismember them in the womb and suck them into jars and down sinks. Of course this has nothing to do with the fact that the ultrasound machines used in crisis pregnancy centers are quickly becoming one of the most influential factors in a woman making a choice to keep her child. It’s all about the health of the fetus. Sure.

7 Responses to “Uninformed Choice”

  1. Rod Says:

    You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. Females with unwanted pregnancies who see an accurately-performed ultrasound and observe the development of their child will seldom follow through with the abortive procedure.

    A Case in Point: My wife and I were expecting our second child, a boy. The doctors and attendants in the ultrasound room showed us our baby and informed us that he would probably be born with Down’s Syndrome because they detected a cleft palate and smallish renal ducts. They actually told us that the chances were around 80% that he would have “birth defects.” They mentioned the option of aborting, but my wife and I immediately informed them that it was not an option we would consider. RESULT: We had a perfectly-healthy baby boy who scored a perfect score on the APGAR scale.

    Here’s my question: How many couples have decided to abort using their doctors’ and attendants’ faulty analyses?

    It’s too gruesome to consider.

    In His grip, and praying He doesn’t make a fist,
    Rod

  2. Daae Says:

    Rod, almost the exact same thing happened to us. After an ultrasound we were told by the radiologist that there was a good chance our first son would be born with Down’s (they saw hydronephrosis and bent pinkies or something like that), and what did we want to do about it? Answer: nothing. He’s almost 12 now and healthy as a horse.

    Some radiologists are quacks and NO WAY should they have that kind of power over life and death.

  3. Simon Says:

    Putting aside the important moral questions at hand, I have no idea what your individual stories show (although I’m glad the best has worked out for you all and your children). Many medical tests and diagnoses are based on odds — that’s all — odds. A medical team tells patients what the odds are of this … the odds are of that … and people have to decide what to do in light of what things are worth to them. Individual cases don’t really show that others who are told that they’re kid might have downs will wind up having a perfectly healthy kid.

    What I’m saying doesn’t cut one or the other on the moral questions at issue … I’m just saying that individual stories do not, either.

  4. Rod Says:

    Simon, I understand what you are saying. Here’s the rub: how many couples (or singles, for that matter) make the decision to abort based on the percentages (correct or not) given to them by people who are either not trained properly or basing available options(narrowly limited in some cases due to preconceived judgments based on appearances) based on faulty presuppositions.

  5. Simon Says:

    Well, I don’t know Rod, but you clearly are pointing to something that would be a serious problem in anyone’s opinion: namely, the existence/reliance on poorly trained and/or incompetent medical staff persons. I’m not exactly sure what you have in mind in referring to “faulty presuppositions,” though. But without a doubt, negligent/incompetent/poorly trained technicians pose a danger to any woman’s/couple’s/fetus’ well-being.

  6. Daae Says:

    “…and people have to decide what to do in light of what things are worth to them…”

    Simon, this statement demonstrates the problem. In light of what things are worth to them? What things are you referring to?

    Elle’s post is about so-called feminists who are pretending to care about the risks presented to fetuses as a result of the ultrasound procedure. Elle believes (and I agree with her) that what so-called feminists really care about is limiting ultrasound usage so that fetuses will remain invisible and their collective right to actually be born will continue to be ignored.

    Rod’s and my comments digress, I admit. We each had experiences in which we were told that our unborn children would probably be abnormal, and we were given the choice of whether to allow the child to be born, or to kill it in utero. We decided not to kill our children, accepting the possibility that they could be born with Down’s. Neither child was actually born with Down’s, thanks be to God.

    A baby was aborted recently in England for the crime of having a cleft palate, something dutifully reported by a radiologist. It’s a condition easily repaired by surgery, but the parents thought the whole thing would be just too harrowing for them to endure, so they killed their baby. Is that okay in a civilized society? Right now, it is.

    The radiologist’s job is to report what he observes. His advice to us SHOULD have been, “eat healthy, get lots of rest, and prepare for the birth of your baby.” In other words, abortion should not be an option.

    If a fetus has a right to be born, it has a right to be born. It’s that simple. The choice we were given was a false choice, and the doctor had no right to give it.

    Think of it this way: follosing a successful delivery, should a doctor be able to hand a new mother a pillow and say, “your infant has Down’s Syndrome. You need to decide whether or not to smother him. Take your time, make the right decision.” I don’t think so.

  7. Simon Says:

    Daae,

    Well, you’re right: “If a fetus has a right to be born, it has a right to be born. It’s that simple.”

    I don’t think we need, once again, to rehash arguments here — there’s no reason to bore everyone again. But the key word in your sentence is “if.” I’ve said that i think embryos and fetuses should be valued (and thus it seems wrong to discard one merely because it has a cleft palate); but at the same time, I don’t think abortion is murder. I know you disagree … I know the arguments …

    And I will say that if people have base motives in not wanting women to have ultrasounds, then i have a problem with it as well. So you see? There is room for agreement between those who are pro-life under all conditions and those who believe women have to have some right to choose.

    That’s probably doesn’t please you too much …. anyway ….

    Simon

Leave a Reply


A GARBAGE ERROR has occured!
Go to the Contact section and notify to me!

 
 

This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots. (see: www.captcha.net)

You must read and type the 5 chars within 0..9 and A..F, and submit the form.

  

Oh no, I cannot read this. Please, generate a