Reply
October2011 2 kids; Pennsylvania 6680 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting Kayla [:)]♥:" The biological parents wanted the child. That's why they hired a surro. to CARRY a child. What they ... [snip!] ... suffer due to severe heart and brain issues. And now they can't do anything about it because the woman moved out of the state."


I UNDERSTAND that! HOWEVER....THEIR child is here. It's no longer about the fact that the pregnancy wasnt terminated. The baby is HERE.

user banned Shreveport, Louisiana 66739 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting Sanveann:" As I said, my oldest has a spectrum of issues that weren't obvious until he was 3 or so. So yes, I'm ... [snip!] ... special-needs kids and wanted a normal one. What were they going to do if this child turned out to be, say, severely autistic?"


So... are we deciding who should and should not be a parent with this statement.

Sanveann 3 kids; Michigan 22 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting Just Ames:" Dude....not even comparable to what this child is facing. And you know what? I don't blame them for wanting ... [snip!] ... be their own person, be a productive citizen and have babies, etc. Is that so wrong for someone to want that of their child? "


No, it's not wrong to want that. Not at all. But depriving her of life because she doesn't live up to their expectations seems very wrong, to me.

uəəๅๅoƆ fuknutz, NM, Togo 105301 posts
status 5th Mar '13
Quoting October2011:" No, i totally get that. But what i don't get is that the child is HERE in the world, living, and she's ... [snip!] ... the fact that this beautiful little girl is here now, and its too much of an inconvenience for her parents to parent her."


Thats a big assumption right there.

Do you think every parent that chooses not to birth a severly disabled child does so solely because it's an "inconvenience"?

Don't assume you know a persons reasons.

.t a y l o r. 3 kids; Indiana 3847 posts
5th Mar '13

What would've happened had they not caught the abnormalities on the ultrasound? Like, they didn't know anything was wrong until birth?

Sanveann 3 kids; Michigan 22 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting TantricLemons:" So... are we deciding who should and should not be a parent with this statement."


No. I'm just saying that people who go into parenthood with the idea that they'll only accept a physically perfect, neurotypical child should probably do a LOT of thinking about what parenthood can really be like.

October2011 2 kids; Pennsylvania 6680 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting .Colleen.:" Thats a big assumption right there. Do you think every parent that chooses not to birth a severly ... [snip!] ... to birth a severly disabled child does so solely because it's an "inconvenience"? Don't assume you know a persons reasons."


so what if the child was presumed healthy and was born without any issues and the bio parents took her home and then a month later a huge health problem was uncovered...would they just adopt her out?

uəəๅๅoƆ fuknutz, NM, Togo 105301 posts
status 5th Mar '13
Quoting Sanveann:" I feel like we're often too quick to judge, or predict, how good someone's quality of life might be. ... [snip!] ... But when you get pregnant, there's no form that says "Check here for a child with no physical or developmental disabilities!" "


I think you are also making a HUGE assumption

There is a world of difference between a "perfect child" and a child with severe birth defects.

I think you are trying to belittle the severity of some conditions :?

Boobo&bugs Due September 24; 1 child; Simpsonville, South Carolina 7068 posts
5th Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting Sanveann:</b>" No. I'm just saying that people who go into parenthood with the idea that they'll only accept a physically ... [snip!] ... accept a physically perfect, neurotypical child should probably do a LOT of thinking about what parenthood can really be like."</blockquote>




The family obviously knows what parenting can be like. As someone else said they already have children with sn. So your point doesn't really make sense. They were told this child would have no quality of life. They made a decision based on what they were told. That doesn't mean they decided to abort a child because something was wrong, they decided to abort because the child would not have close to any quality of life they would want for them to have. It doesn't mean you should judge their right to parent.

October2011 2 kids; Pennsylvania 6680 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting .Colleen.:" I think you are also making a HUGE assumption There is a world of difference between a "perfect ... [snip!] ... "perfect child" and a child with severe birth defects. I think you are trying to belittle the severity of some conditions :?"


i think we all understand the severity of this baby's problems.. But the thing is..She's been born. So she's no longer a choice to be made but a child to care for.

uəəๅๅoƆ fuknutz, NM, Togo 105301 posts
status 5th Mar '13
Quoting Sanveann:" As I said, my oldest has a spectrum of issues that weren't obvious until he was 3 or so. So yes, I'm ... [snip!] ... special-needs kids and wanted a normal one. What were they going to do if this child turned out to be, say, severely autistic?"


This is a ridiculous comparision

You are trying to compare special needs that are evident in a toddler to severe birth defects in a fetus.
Completely different, they are not giving away their 3 yo b/c she is not perfect:?

October2011 2 kids; Pennsylvania 6680 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting .Colleen.:" This is a ridiculous comparision You are trying to compare special needs that are evident in a toddler ... [snip!] ... toddler to severe birth defects in a fetus. Completely different, they are not giving away their 3 yo b/c she is not perfect:?"

The child in question here is no longer a fetus.

Sanveann 3 kids; Michigan 22 posts
5th Mar '13
Quoting .Colleen.:" This is a ridiculous comparision You are trying to compare special needs that are evident in a toddler ... [snip!] ... toddler to severe birth defects in a fetus. Completely different, they are not giving away their 3 yo b/c she is not perfect:?"


How do you know they wouldn't? They seemed to think a good solution, at one point, was surrendering her to the state as soon as she was born. The surrogate was the one who went out and found an adoptive family because she was concerned she wouldn't get decent care in the foster system.

uəəๅๅoƆ fuknutz, NM, Togo 105301 posts
status 5th Mar '13
Quoting October2011:" so what if the child was presumed healthy and was born without any issues and the bio parents took her ... [snip!] ... and the bio parents took her home and then a month later a huge health problem was uncovered...would they just adopt her out? "


Idk them so I could not say if they would give up their child. But it was their choice and in their agreement to terminate a fetus with severe abnormalities.

again, these are COMPLETELY different scenarios, like comparing apples to oranges :?



Terminating means the child was never born, finding out about special needs afterwards cannot be an abortion issue :idea:



uəəๅๅoƆ fuknutz, NM, Togo 105301 posts
status 5th Mar '13
Quoting October2011:" i think we all understand the severity of this baby's problems.. But the thing is..She's been born. So she's no longer a choice to be made but a child to care for."


Right, already born against the parents wishes.
and they did not wish to bring a child into the world with no quality of life.

What is your point?