Posted on 12/11/2019 12:20:45 AM PST by Morgana
The introduction of a controversial new prenatal screening technique has led to a dramatic drop in the number of babies born with Down’s syndrome.
Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) was introduced in some NHS hospitals in England to more accurately test unborn babies for certain conditions. It has been claimed to detect Down’s syndrome with around 99 per cent accuracy.
The number of babies born with the condition fell by 30 per cent in hospitals where NIPT is being used, and The Sunday Times reported that more women who have the test go on to have abortions.
No assessment
The Government had originally planned to introduce NIPT nationally around autumn 2018, but this was postponed and no new start date has been confirmed.
Campaign group Don’t Screen Us Out pointed out that the Government has previously admitted that “no assessment was made of the impact that the roll-out of will have on the lives of people with Down’s syndrome”.
Lynn Murray, a spokeswoman for the campaign said: “As a mother of a 19-year-old daughter who has Down’s syndrome, I see every day the unique value she brings to our family and the positive impact she has on others around her.
“The figures released today show that the fears of the Down’s syndrome community that rolling out these tests would lead to a large drop in the number of babies with Down’s syndrome were not unfounded.”
‘Unethical’
She continued: “We are calling on the Government to halt preparations to further roll-out the tests on the NHS immediately and to undertake an urgent inquiry into the impact that these tests are having on birth numbers of babies with Down’s syndrome.
“It is totally unethical and discriminatory for the Government to go any further with the roll-out of the tests given that data from NHS hospitals shows that these tests are leading to the reduction in the numbers of people from a specific community.”
Down’s syndrome test leads to more abortions?
Well. Duh.
When the medical people came after me for all kinds of things (trying to justify and pay for their equipment, they told me I was scheduled for an ultrasound they had a fit when I refused.
I told them I wouldn’t need it
They said ‘but you’re over (some age)
I asked them what they could do if the baby had downs
They had nothing to say. I was supposed to expose my kid’s developing brain to high frequency sound. Untested for long term effects. While about every family I knew had a boy with autism/aspergers.
For nothing...
I said no. Killing was not an option.
Ooh they were put out. Insulted.
The medical industry is as truth averse as the democrat party. Sometimes.
Good for you. Its refreshing to hear stories of those who refuse to advance the lies of evil.
Too bad they don’t have a test for the commie gene.
You are the only other person, besides me who wonders about the link between ultra sound and autism.
A relative of mine, who lives in the EU, was pregnant. They tested her blood and told her the child was going to be horribly deformed and she should abort.
I convinced her to pay for a second opinion and they tested the baby’s blood, not just the mother’s (which is combined with the baby’s).
It turns out my relative has a blood disorder that is stable in adults and does not affect the fetus. Her baby girl is now 4 years old, perfectly healthy and happy.
But gov’t healthcare would have aborted that child without compunction.
Imagine if they could find a gay gene and test for it.
As parents abort, the LGBTQ community would be ripped apart.
I can only hope.
peoplle/ don’t think when doctors are around
They used to.
Great. Now bring us a pre natal test for predisposition to voting Democrat Party.
That is abortable.
An ultrasound saved my baby’s life and probably mine as well. I had a complete placental previa, had I even begun the labor process, the placenta would have detached and he would have bled out in seconds. I most likely would have done the same.
Because if the condition I had many ultrasounds Throughout the rest of my pregnancy and he is not at all on the autism spectrum.
Our niece’s baby’s life was also saved by an ultrasound that detected a severe complication. Had she not had a c-section the baby would have died in labor.
Ultrasounds save lives; in my opinion it’s foolhardy to reject them out of hand as a money grubbing scheme by the medical establishment.
I kept my Downs baby and nine years later I have had not one moment of regret. He’s an amazing kid and everyone that meets him loves him to death.
I did not I reject routine ultrasounds in the case of looking for downs sun the purpose of which are for choosing whether or not to kill the child
That is not healing medicine. It is money grubbing. Period
I also am aware that ultrasound is untested and unquestioned for long term effects by parents as well as the medical industry.
There are millions of ultrasounds performed with no apparent long term effects. There is also a ridiculous lack of curiosity in the medical industry regarding the epidemic of autism. So ridiculous that I must be vigilant on my own.
Plastics, microwave, social media, tge use of social media by minors,
I follow the thinking of my grandmothers who questioned everything. No one can tell me no one knew smoking was bad. These women certainly did.
Fetal Ultrasound has its place and seems to help. But routine and frequent maybe with a defective machine, a poorly trained technician. Unquestioned? I don’t get that.
I agree that US is an effective tool. I am not sure that it is best used as a pregnancy confirmaion tool or a sex of the baby confirmaiton tool. Particurly in first trimester.
We dealt with the same; for one they suggested an amniocentesis after seeing something on the ultrasound and we wouldn’t do it (miscarriage risk). They made all kinds of dire predictions, suggested “starting over”, and all of our children were fine.
Evil people.
Evil indeed
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.