Wed, 05 Sep 2012 6:21p.m.
A test for Down's syndrome that's more accurate, and less risky, is close to being ready in the UK.
Read the full story »
Post a Comment
Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide
(Won't be published)
17/09/2012 11:25:18 a.m.
At the end of the day expectant parents take ultrasound screenings to see the health of their unborn baby otherwise why bother taking any tests or screenings.
The big issue here that keeps getting missed is how are we going to get better rights & health care for those that have Down Syndrome that are here right now. It is these kids & young adults that need advocating right now.
6/09/2012 10:54:04 a.m.
Mike Sullivan wrote:
Through all the smoke and mirrors, it's good old eugenics. See Saving Downs response at http://www.savingdowns.com/down-syndrome-screening-seeing-eugenics-through-the-fog/
6/09/2012 10:30:37 a.m.
I would say that the tests have been funded to reduce support costs later on however it does give the expectant couple a choice - which some would welcome. So I guess the real question is - should we be given the opportunity to choose? Nature is harsh and sometimes appears cruel but it is based on the strong survive. This concept has worked for Millions of years and is clear to see why, it is only humans that have the intelligence and emotional ties to act against this but that does not mean we are correct to do so! If you look at this from intellectual reasoning based on nature (a well proven tried and tested winner) we would terminate but it is only our emotions that cause us to act differently and go against our logic. Maybe it just comes down to care and support without a negative impact on the whole group, ie The rest of us are not impacted on by this outcome! So that then still gives no answer. There are obvious benefits to terminate re time and financial but on the other side we gain love compassion admiration all emotions that greatly improve the group as a whole. So give them the choice and let the individual decide for themselves maybe the best option.
6/09/2012 12:19:02 a.m.
Stella McLeod wrote:
I noticed the report acknowledged that children with Down syndrome bring love and joy to their parents, so why are they being targeted for destruction in the womb? Why are these totally unnecessary tests "needed"? The reality is this has far more to do with the cost effectiveness of "preventing" someone's birth compared to providing extra educational, health and welfare benefits. In other words it's cheaper for governments to kill than to care. Meanwhile parents are taught to fear their own children and told they "need" to either be prepared or reassured. Down syndrome can be diagnosed safely after birth. There is absolutely no need to cause a whole lot of usually unnecessary anxiety during pregnancy. For more information on what antenatal screening is really about please read this: http://www.savingdowns.com/down-syndrome-screening-seeing-eugenics-through-the-fog/
More than 50 New Zealanders die of asthma every year – about one a week.
GlaxoSmithKline has joined forces with aid agency Save the Children to provide a chemical used in mouthwash to disinfect the bellybuttons of newborn babies.
Last night we looked at the work being done in some of our poorest schools to fight childhood poverty.
Nurses waiting at a busy Canterbury weigh station caught truckies off guard today.
New Zealanders who've developed bladder cancer after taking a drug to treat type 2 diabetes are being urged to join a group lawsuit.
New research suggests that you're likely to do wor...
A former military helicopter pilot will become the...
A 15-year-old school student has developed a new t...
Wellington philanthropist Gareth Morgan has announ...
It's being described as one of the most exciting d...
Copyright © 2013 MediaWorks TV. All Rights Reserved.