All Pregnant Women Should “Screen” for Down’s Syndrome – American and Canadian Ob Gyn Colleges

LifeSiteNews ^ | 1/11/07 | Hilary White

[wagglebee]

OTTAWA, January 11, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In the same month, both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC) are recommending that all pregnant women, not just those over 35, should be screened, including with invasive procedures such as amniocentesis, to discover whether they have a risk of bearing a child with Down’s Syndrome.

While the ACOG media release does not directly mention abortion as the usual fate of the “screened” babies, a SOGC official readily admits that the Canadian recommendation was specifically intended to give women the option to abort a child with Down’s Syndrome.

“Yes, it's going to lead to more termination, but it's going to be fair to these women who are 24 who say, 'How come I have to raise an infant with Down's syndrome, whereas my cousin who was 35 didn't have to?’” Dr. Andre Lalonde, the executive vice president of the SOGC, told the National Post.

Dr. Lalonde said the only ethical consideration is to ensure that an abortion is “what the woman wants”. “We have to be fair to give women a choice,” he said.

The National Post says that SOGC’s recommendation, to be released in the society's journal on February 1, is that pregnant women under 40 “be given” non-invasive screening and amniocentesis if their risk for Down's syndrome appears high. Pregnant women over the age of 40 should “automatically be given amniocentesis” the Post reports.

On January 2, ACOG’s media release said women should automatically “be offered” the option of “less invasive” screening, such as genetic counseling and ultrasounds, as well as the more dangerous amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) to detect any possible “chromosome abnormality or…inherited condition”.

Canada’s pro-life leaders expressed outrage at the eugenic implications of the recommendations.

Jim Hughes, National President of CLC responded to SOGC saying, “More than 3 million babies have already been killed by abortion. Sex-selection is quickly becoming an option and a threat to the unborn, and now the medical profession, that is supposed to save lives, is proposing to terminate lives based on its medical version of acceptability.”

Joseph Boyle, a professor teaching Christian bioethics at the University of Toronto told the National Post that though having more information is itself a good thing, the ethics depends upon what is done with it.

“Other than having an abortion if the child is discovered to have Down's,” he said, “what good is that information going to be?”

ACOG says the goal is to “offer procedures with “high detection rates and low false positive rates” and admits that the invasive amniocentesis and CVS procedures can result in what they call “pregnancy loss.”

Dr. James Goldberg, a former chairman of ACOG’s committee on genetics, told the New York Times that the recommendation to offer younger women the invasive procedures was worth the risk of miscarriage.

He said that for most couples, “losing a normal pregnancy secondary to the procedure is not as problematic as the birth of a Down syndrome child, so they’re willing to take that risk.”

The ACOG guidelines were published in the January edition of journal Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Earlier Screening for Down’s Syndrome May Fuel Eugenic Program Against Disabled
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/nov/05111002.html

[wagglebee]

“Yes, it's going to lead to more termination, but it's going to be fair to these women who are 24 who say, 'How come I have to raise an infant with Down's syndrome, whereas my cousin who was 35 didn't have to?’” Dr. Andre Lalonde, the executive vice president of the SOGC, told the National Post.

What a sick, demented view of human life.

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[Mikey_1962]

Screen and what?

Accept what God has given you?

If you are willing to accept what God almighty has given you, then why screen?

We all know why screening is done...

[luckystarmom]

I agree with screening women over 35 who are at risk if they want to be screened. The reason I would agree with screening is that they can have time to prepare for a special needs infant before the infant is born. We have family friends who have a down syndrome child, and they didn't find out until the baby was born. They were totally shocked and unprepared.

However, I would not have an amnio myself if I was not at high risk because there are risks in having an amnio.

[Sloth]

There's also a significant rate of false positives for this type of screening, IIRC.

[Sloth]

“Yes, it's going to lead to more termination, but it's going to be fair to these women who are 24 who say, 'How come I have to raise an infant with Down's syndrome..."

Ugh, any "mother" that would express such a thought ought to be sterilized.

[Reddy]

“Yes, it's going to lead to more termination, but it's going to be fair to these women who are 24 who say, 'How come I have to raise an infant with Down's syndrome, whereas my cousin who was 35 didn't have to?’” Dr. Andre Lalonde, the executive vice president of the SOGC, told the National Post."

OMGosh! Unbelievable. Just UNBELIEVABLE.

[Always Right]

I have a cousin with Down's Syndrome and several other physical problems. The doctors told them she would not live past 6 months, then they told them she would not live past the age of 4. Now she is over 40 and has been a blessing.

[GreatOne]

I absolutely think everyone should screen. For our third child, my wife and I were told that there was a chance that our daughter could have Downs. What an emotional gut-shot! Fortunately, it turned out that the doctor doing the testing had the date of conception off by a month, so there were no worries (they use the date of conception, levels of certain chemicals in woman's body, and parabola chart to determine these things). However, I would have hated to have discovered that I had a Downs baby at birth.

Don't get me wrong, your sentiment is completely understandable. I am aware of doctors that actually encourage killing the baby if a problem is discovered. My experience actually made me more pro-life because of the horror of realizing that my wife and I could just drive to an abortuary and kill our child, and no one would stop us. Ridiculous.

[PistolPaknMama]

Screen and what? Accept what God has given you?

My 28 year old nephew was born Downs. He is quite a character, but hardly a candidate for termination. He didn't just show up Downs to bring retribution upon the unforgiven. No doubt he has shaped all of us, our children and our grandchildren. Plus if we are at a restaurant, park, gas station he introduces me to strangers as his Aunt Sissy (my brother calls me Sissy). Without him I wouldn't be an Aunt Sissy. Don't even tell me the people do not effect the lives they touch and bring a very innocent joy that most of us have lost.

[Lowcountry]

My Brother and his wife got a screen because she was almost 40. The Doctor told them after the results came back that there was an almost certain probability that their child was a Downs baby. There was a ton of hurt in their lives as they struggled for weeks to accept the fate God had given them. They finally got over the pain and planned for the challenge.

Several months later they had a perfect baby boy with no problems whatsoever.

A year later, my wife and I were pressed by her OB to have the test because she was going on 38. We told them no, that no test result would change our approach to having the baby. I bet we had to tell that doctor at least 5 times that we would not have the test, but she kept on giving us emotional reasons that we might need it. I thought I would have to slap the woman before we left.

My suggestion is that since the test is so poor at predicting problems, turn it down. If you would never have an abortion, it will not make a difference. If you would have an abortion, you might kill a healthy baby.

[ConservativeGadfly]

I am now 40 years old and seven months pregnant with our third child. I learned my lesson with our first child's AFP test. The AFP or triple-screen, is notoriously incorrect -- just what a hormonal first time mom needs, right?

Not knowing any better, I took the test only to get "the phone call". The doctor called me to tell me that the results showed that my baby would most likely have Trisomy 18 and if he managed to survive birth, would not live to his first birthday. I couldn't breathe.....

But after some much needed prayer, I decided that even if this baby wasn't going to survive, by God whatever organs could be used by a baby who was going to survive may be the reason for my son's condition.

We quickly decided on a Level II ultrasound -- no amnio for us -- and it showed that he was perfectly healthy. And he is a perfectly healthy nearly six year old boy.

With that, we decided to go with Level II ultrasounds for both his brother and now, his sister and all is well! Had that not been the case, however, we would not waver in the strong belief that God had blessed us with a special needs child for a reason and we would accept His will.

Part of being a parent, I think, is learning to distinguish rather early on that the needs of the child outweigh anything, including the convenience of the parents.

[TheHound]

However, I would not have an amnio myself if I was not at high risk because there are risks in having an amnio.

The question is: if you think you know the baby will have Downs, would you abort him/her? Our decision was we would not, even when "they" said she had elavated proteins. If you will not abort, then amnio is useless, and as you note , a risk.

[KoRn]

We have 4 children with another one on the way. If tests would have shown a strong likelihood of Down Syndrome I'm not sure what we would have done.

One train of thought leads me to terminating any pregnancy we've had if a strong possibility of Downs Syndrome existed. Yet, on the other hand I can look at all of my perfectly healthy children. If any of them were to become ill and suffer brain damage right now would I have them killed?

Hell no, and how would that be any different than if they were still in the womb with brain damage? I can see how some people would struggle with such an issue.

[technomage]

but it's going to be fair to these women who are 24 who say, 'How come I have to raise an infant with Down's syndrome, whereas my cousin who was 35 didn't have to

That is called unbelievable selfishness.

Seems like unborn children are being treated like unwanted pets: Don't like them? Throw them away or kill them.

[Northern Yankee]

My wife and I were presented with a ton of health issues at the time she was pregnant with our youngest daughter. The doctors thought she would be severly handicapped, if she even survived the birth.

We were given the option of abortion. (That was never an option in our minds.) Are we heading towards a society where the imperfect will be discarded, like yesterday's garbage?

I pray that we don't.

[DaveyB]

Margret Sanger would be proud. "Murder the babies - they are not like us" - The blood-lust is appalling.

Is it a stretch to rewrite as ... women who are 24 who say, 'How come I have to raise that's a girl/boy, whereas my cousin who was 35 didn't have to?’

[Cloverfarm]

... “losing a normal pregnancy secondary to the procedure is not as problematic as the birth of a Down syndrome child, so they’re willing to take that risk.” ...

The logical flaw there is to assume there will be another pregnancy. Sometimes, sadly, there isn't.

My cousin had a false-positive AFP and went through all the emotions before delivering a normal baby boy.

So we skipped all testing with our kids even though we were past our sell-by date of 35. All perfectly healthy.

[Kolokotronis]

I'm sure glad the greatest blessing in our family life, our 23 year old son with Down Syndrome didn't get terminated! These people will simply go directly to hell and, God forgive me, I'll stand there and cheer no matter where I end up!