BellaOnline Forums Relationships Married No Kids Not married - no kids - disability choice

I think the difference is between children with disabilities that are already here versus knowingly having a child that will have a disability. Children with disabilities can live productive lives and be happy. I don't think any of us are against children with disabilities. However, I think it is unfair to have a child when you know it could be born with a disability, just because the parent "wants" a child. There are many children already born, healthy and otherwise, that need loving parents. Yes there are many things that can happen in life to make a child's life hard but why knowingly add to that. (obviously it is a different case if the parents had no idea they were carriers of a disease or disability)

Excellent points. But who gets to decide the definition of a disability? You may think I have disabilities and genetic defects, but I may not think so.

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't believe Myrabeth got bingoed in the CF forum. I feel like I've been slapped in the face. How selfish someone must be to come here and do that.

I agree wholeheartedly that discussing family history needs to be discussed. I know from personal experience how strong the biological need is to have a child. But should the outside world decide what a disability is, and the rest of us fall in place?

First, I agree completely that parts of the SNC editor's post were inappropriate and I will talk with her about it. Please put off further responses in that vein until I can. The point has been made, and I will ensure that it is followed through on. The purpose of the banner was so that that type of post was NOT made in here, and all posters (including editors) need to be aware of that. I would consider editing the post but since several people have commented on it already, it would make things more confusing.

I think Gillian's initial post is very important and it's a good topic to talk about in general.

In general, though, I think people need to be very aware of the strong emotional statements which would cause someone in the special needs children area to feel impassioned, when it is stated somewhere that "children of XXXXX do not deserve to live". We touched on this briefly in another thread here but I think it deserves some elaboration.

It is easy as a child free person to say - intellectually - "only children of X quality level should be born". That is a fine statement to make from a logic-only point of view.

However, human beings are very emotionally driven people, and emotions *cannot* be separated from logic. There are many excellent books we can discuss if we want to get into that. Emotion is a required part of being human. It cannot be divested from our brain's processes.

So let's say that African Americans are genetically less likely to live long, healthy lives - and have slightly lower IQs. You could say - logically - that we should have only non-African-Americans breed for the overall better health of the human race. That might be true. But as human beings, if you made that suggestion, it would cause huge - proper - outrage. It is not appropriate to start "weighing the value" of human beings against each other. Every human has something to offer.

So if you start saying "children with situation X should not be alive" it would naturally upset people who DID have children with situation X. There is no way around it.

An analogy would be if someone decided that a trait your loved partner had was not appropriate any more, and came and took him away and shot him. That is what it is like - that a random third person, who is not involved in your life - is telling you that a person you love dearly is not worth having alive.

So while we can certainly discuss many topics here - I think this one in particular is one to be more aware of what you are doing. You are causing huge emotional pain to people by so flippantly saying people do not deserve to live. That is a much higher insult level than for that person to say "you should be with someone who fully loves and respects what you are, without considering part of you flawed". Yes, neither is appropriate - but the first is far more inappropriate.

But I don't think the issue is a person with "x" should not be allowed to live. It's knowing that you could create a person with "x" and willingly do so. There are many people already with "x" disability, many children who already have it so why not care for them rather than risk another child. I do think people have different definitions of what a disability is and thus no third person should come in and monitor their reproductive choices. This comes back to the duty of the prospective parents to decide, unfortunately just because one person can live a happy life with "x" doesn't mean all people can. people have different ways of handling situations. What may be liveable or bearable for one person might distroy another mentally or emotionally. How do you know your child can handle living with "x"? Is it worth the risk? Again this does not mean a person with "x" is not allowed to live but a choice made before conceiving.

I mean this in a way to promote discussion not put anyone down for their own choices, these are my thoughts.

I'm hoping no one was offended by my posts. I'm of the thought that the nature of a debate is to examine an issue from all angles, and agree to disagree. If you can offer some personal experience, it adds weight to your argument.

No one should leave a forum based on someone else's opinion. After all, we all learn from each other. Feel free to blast away at me, though. :-)

As I've stated before, I am opposed to the public/government having as say in who should have kids.

I am strongly in favor of individuals and couples putting serious thought into ALL aspects of what they would give a potential child, including genetic predisposition to health problems. That is the first stage in responsible, loving parenting: deciding if your potential offspring would start out in life with his or her "best foot forward."

Every child has the right to live, but every potential parent has the obligation to their possible children to consider the child's best interests before conception. I firmly believe that.

My parents wanted kids. They didn't consider ALL the possible repercussions of passing on the knee problems on Mom's side. In 2002, both of their kids (ages 21 and 14 at the time) had serious knee injuries brought on by the genetic "flub" that runs in Mom's family. I will limp at least a little bit for the rest of my life. As I said, that's a minor thing. There are people out there with much more serious negative traits that ought not be passed on. I guess it's about self awareness and pushing aside one's own ego in favor of logic (as much as one can).

No, I'm not a fencesitter. I never have been. I don't really like most children, but that's just me. I decided to definitely not have kids 9 years before I found out my predisposition to knee problems would end up under a surgeon's knife and change my life.

We've thought things through, in so many different ways. For our lives, and our situation, it's clear that having a sibling would negatively impact my almost-step-daughter's life. That's a red flag. She's already here, and deserves the best we can give her. If we knew going in that adding a young sibling would not have a positive impact on her life, and had another kid anyway, we'd be proving ourselves to be poor parents for both children, and incredibly selfish besides.

Her father agrees on this point. So I stay with a man who, in another woman's hands, may have ended up siring another kid or two. If he felt strongly about having more kids, I would have left him to that goal years ago. But I have given him the time and opportunity to consider it all, and he has decided he is happy to have a life that includes both myself and his wonderful daughter. And he sees that another kid would not benefit anyone in our particular situation, let alone are we in an adequate position to benefit another child... Not to mention the fact that he loves "his girls" (his daughter and I) just they way they are.

Thanks to everyone who responded in my defense. Goodbye.