London, England, Mar 4, 2017 / 04:09 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Is it ok to abort a baby who has been diagnosed with Down syndrome? What about if you find out the baby is a girl, and you wanted a boy?
One UK ethics watchdog recently endorsed early pregnancy tests to screen for Down syndrome but opposed the same tests to find out the baby’s sex, lest it lead to gendercide.
And that logic is far too widespread, says a disabilities rights group, which is challenging such thinking in a recent petition.
“While many denounce gendercide and few would argue that parents should be free to abort a girl because they prefer a boy, when it comes to Down syndrome, the logic tragically changes. It becomes a valued individual ‘free and accepted choice’ to discriminate against people with genetic variations. How is this possible?”, asks a petition from Stop Discriminating Down, a project of the Jerome Lejeune Foundation and DownPride.
This week, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics published its findings on non-invasive prenatal testing, recommending it should not be used to reveal the unborn child’s sex, lest it promote sex-selective abortion.
However, it also recommended that NIPT be accessible to parents who wish to find out whether their child “has a significant medical condition or impairment, but only within an environment that enables them to make autonomous, informed choices.”
The test involves taking a blood sample from the mother at around 9 or 10 weeks of pregnancy. It is a non-invasive way of testing for genetic conditions and variations in the unborn child, and is thus safer than invasive measures such as amniocentesis, which carry a risk of miscarriage and other harms to the child.
The Nuffield Council’s recommendations would encourage the use of NIPT to screen for Down syndrome, Edwards syndrome, and Patau syndrome – “fetal anomalies” that in England, Wales, and Scotland are grounds for abortion under the Abortion Act 1967. The National Health Service will offer NIPT to pregnant women whose unborn children have a high risk of these anomalies from 2018.
The Nuffield Council noted that 74 percent of pregnant women in the UK currently choose to have a screening test for Down syndrome, and that between 89 and 95 percent of women abort their child after receiving a Down syndrome diagnosis.
It estimates that annually, nearly 200 more fetuses with Down syndrome in the UK will be identified, and there will be an estimated 17 fewer miscarriages related to procedures such as amniocentesis.
However, an additional 200 fetuses who are identified as having Down syndrome means, given the figures provided by the Nuffield Council, that nearly between 178 and 190 of those fetuses will be aborted.
“To offset the possibility that the increased use of NIPT might adversely affect disabled people, the Government … have a duty to provide disabled people with high quality specialist health and social care, and to tackle discrimination, exclusion and negative societal attitudes,” the Nuffield Council wrote in its report.
The council acknowledged, however, that introducing NIPT could affect the specialist health and social care received by disabled persons, and the importance attributed to research into their conditions.
And “Making NIPT available on the NHS could be perceived as sending negative and hurtful messages about the value of people with the syndromes being tested for,” it added. “Disabled people and their families might be more vulnerable to discrminination, stigma or abuse if NIPT gives rise to perceptions that people are ‘to blame’ for having a baby with a disability.”
The council also recommended that NIPT be accompanied by “accurate, balanced and non-directive information for women and couples,” and that private providers of the test be monitored to ensure their advertising is neither misleading nor harmful.
Turning from screening for “fetal anomalies”, the Nuffield Council said that “NIPT should not generally be used to find out whether a fetus has a less significant medical condition or impairment, has an adult onset condition, or carries a copy of a gene tht does not cause a condition on its own. Nor should it be used to reveal non-medical features of the fetus, such as sex.”
It added that “the Government should ensure that private NIPT providers stop offering fetal sex determination,” and that it should establish that “whole genome sequencing of fetuses is not offered outside research environments.”
The report of Nuffield Council acknowledged “the offer of NIPT to determine the sex of the fetus at an early stage of pregnancy may increase the risk of sex selective terminations taking place,” which they said “there is some evidence that sex selective terminations have happened in the UK, and they are known to occur in other countries.”
Sex-selective abortions are illegal in the UK, but in recent years the government has been criticized for a lack of enforcement.
The UK’s Department of Health has expressed concern for the pressure on pregnant women in some south Asian immigrant communities to have boys, and former Minister of Parliament Paul Uppal has said “the expectation is there – I’ve seen it firsthand myself.”
Advocates for persons with Down syndrome are strongly opposed to the expansion of NIPT.
Stop Discriminating Down says that “Government encouraged selective abortion, the refusal to provide health-benefits, or the refusal to provide adequate medical care equal to that provided to their typical peers is a social and moral crime against all people with disabilities and their families who thanks to developments in research, medical care, and social acceptance have many possibilities. The expansion of government sponsored prenatal screening and abortion stand in stark contradiction to the social progress made over the past 40 years towards an inclusive and equal society.”
“While throughout the world we petition, walk, and meet together to fight against discrimination and to protect biodiversity, no-one should have to defend threats to their life because of his or her genetic make-up. In a humane world aware of the need for acceptance and inclusion of differences, people with Down syndrome should not be discriminated against.”
[…]
Which “homosexuality” are they referring to? The sanitized for Western consumption, post-AIDS homosexuality where “gay marriage” is still largely “open marriage?” Or the inherently self-injurious “gay lifestyle” due to psychological and physical challenges to immunity (including substance abuse)even in the most accepting of cities, communities?
In the spirit of Aristotle will “gay awareness” include the actual facts/statistics?
Which one is a “misread” of Scripture?
Every single one of them should be pitched out of whatever offices they hold, and laicized, perhaps even excommunicated. And if I were the civil police I would be carefully investigating to see what crimes they have been committing that makes them want this evil legitimized.
Here is more evidence of the spread of the influence of Satan through sexuality. Homosexuality is a deviant sexual behavior along with Pedophilia and TransGenderism. We have already seen liberals calling for an “understanding” and acceptance of Pedophiles as simply another sexual orientation. They want to open the doors to public acceptance of child abuse. So far they have begun to make legal infanticide so it’s not that far a leap to child sexual abuse given the ease at which they have reduced a living human being to nothing more than a clump of cells even after birth. The evil of the past is showing it’s face and the destruction of the human soul starting with the most innocent has begun.
A synodal church to be.
In short, “We make these demands! Have a nice trip to Rome and say hi to the pope for us.”
What is Holy Mother Church in America doing about punishment for convicted child molesters? Celibacy is one of the vows a priest makes when receiving the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Obviously when a priest breaks his vow of celibacy he needs to speak with not only his bishop, to find out if he would be better suited as a married man; but, he also needs to speak with a licensed trained psychiatrist to help discover why he should remain a priest or live the rest of his life as a married Roman Catholic husband and future father of children. I’ve seen priests who were almost forced into the priesthood by parents who simply had to have one son who would be the priest of the family. Child molestation is another matter altogether. Convicted pedophiles should never be shuffled from parish to parish. These men are preditors and not merely men who made poor career choices. The Roman Catholic Church should never try to hide these men. Of course pedophiles require intensive therapy by trained psychiatrists. As an almost 68 year old Roman Catholic woman, I am ashamed that my beloved church has covered up for these men. I truly believe that the pedophilic priest must be defrocked and never, even as a Roman Catholic layman, be permitted to work with children as long as he lives. Permitting the pedophile to continue as a priest is wrong. He is a mentally disturbed person who needs help, of course. He is not a man to be trusted with the innocent child, ever again. The priest should always be able to be trusted by children and adults, especially those who have no one else to comfort them in their day to day life. I’ve always put my priests upon a pedistal because I realized, especially as I became an adult, they gave up married life, a wife and family, to deserve me calling him, with the greatest of love, “Father.” When I go to Confession and hear a priest encouraging me to empty my heart of troubles, as I say, “Bless me, Father, for I have sinned.”, I know that the holy and celibate priest, who deserves all my respect for all his sacrifices, knows how to help me make peace with God and he will absolve me of my transgressions. There is no room for convicted pedophiles in the priesthood of Holy Mother Church. He has stolen the innocence of a trusting and helpless child. He has murdered Innocense itself, as surely as those Roman soldiers tried to murder Baby Jesus while killing the Holy Innocents.
“Obviously when a priest breaks his vow of celibacy”
If I’m understanding correctly, “celibacy” means not marrying. So the problem with most of those priests is that they are not being chaste, as we are all called to be according to our states in life.
“he needs to speak with not only his bishop, to find out if he would be better suited as a married man;”
That should have been done before he was ordained. Added to which, something like 80% of the “pedophilia” cases were actually cases of homosexual assault on post-pubescent boys, which isn’t actually pedophilia.
“he also needs to speak with a licensed trained psychiatrist”
I wouldn’t trust a psychiatrist. Listening to psychiatrists’ advice was part of what led to moving abusers around; and the psychiatrists’ association also decided that homosexuality is not a mental disorder anymore, and that “transgenderism” is just fine.
“I’ve seen priests who were almost forced into the priesthood by parents who simply had to have one son who would be the priest of the family.”
Somehting which, again, should have been discovered during the discernment process, during their time in seminary – in short, *before* they were ordained. Why wasn’t it? How many priests was this that you’ve seen? When? How did you know that was why they became priests?
“poor career choices.” The priesthood isn’t a career, it’s a calling. Any man who thinks of it as a career shouldn’t be one.
The only absolute Dogma Cardinal Marx believes in is the Church Tax he and his cohorts extort from the Catholic Faithful in Germany.
More probing than spearhead. Prominent Catholic Black Ops Led by Fr Wucherpfennig openly homosexual rector mission to test enemy assets Cardinal Marx their Quisling [since it’s so ludicrously obvious I’m compelled to resort to humor however true]. As prev acknowledged the true enemy are advocates of normalizing the abomination of homosexuality posturing heroic aware as devious cowards they have Vatican and majority societal support. Quislings abound among German Hierarchy very few comparable to 1941 Hierarchy led by Augustus Cardinal von Galen. Although there are a few good men among them. With faith and God’s arm they can win the day. Even if vanquished by the morally disabled their strong resistance is in itself victory.
Open Letter to a group of Nine prominent German Catholics who want a new morality, women priests, etc. Your demands are not exactly a news bombshell. The Catholic faithful worldwide have been hearing this rubbish on and off for over 50 years. Your heretical gripes are getting old and boring. And there exists a fast solution to your unjust gripes: Leave the Roman Catholic Church and start your own church. It’s that simple. No sense sticking with the Church with over 2,000 years of constant teachings about morality and doctrinal beliefs when you Nine prominent German Catholics can start your own new-wave type of church. Frankly, I have more respect for the 16th century Protestant Reformers who left the Church instituted by Christ rather than sticking with it when they no longer believed in its core teachings. You have the full freedom to leave because no one is pointing a gun to your prominent heads, demanding your life or your consent. Parting advice: It is not psychologically sound to with an institution which you find abhorrent.