7 month old foetus aborted over cleft palate....

[RedImperator]

An interesting question is for a late term abortion, say 6-7 months, when would you find it a better alternative to abort than have a child? For instance what if you discover late in the game that the child will have Downs Syndrome? Extreme Mental Retardation? Nasty Birth defects? Where do we draw the line and say and this point you MUST have this child otherwise it is immoral?

Obviously a cleft palate is ridiculous for a reason but I wonder what would happen when the result is a lot murkier. Where quality of life for parent and child will just be horrible.

I've held a seven month premie baby in my arms. They are basically fully developed, tiny and frail but definately a full on baby so that can really snap you back to reality when you discuss abortions this late in the game. It most likley should be termed euthansia at that point.

I would say that if the birth defect is not survivable, then an abortion to prevent the mother from having to carry a doomed child to term is actually the more moral choice. Obviously, that still leaves a big murky area, though.

[Broomstick]

Yes, in its worst forms cleft palate can be horrific, causing both eating and breathing problems, and creating a sort of canyon across the face. However, that's extremely rare.

Do you have a case example handy? I could be wrong by the bone structure of the face should limit deformity to the nose - upper lip region. Certainly if some other features in the skull fail simultaneously you can have problems, but the front cranium (can't remember the name before fusing) and mandible should be independent of the palette so far as I can recall.

Not really - you've pretty much got the right of it already. Unrepairable cleft lip/palate would almost always be associated with other major cranio-facial defects.

Which still isn't necessarially a good reason to abort. "Looks different" shouldn't be a death sentence.

There have been studies showing that mothers who smoke or drink excessively during pregnancy are more likely to have babies with cleft palettes. Why this is, is not well known.

I'm willing to bet that maternal starvation, malnutrition, and illness of any sort during critical developmental phases can also be a factor in this birth defect, just like a bunch of other defects that basically come down to "didn't grow/develop properly"

GE might help, by removing some triggers, but it certainly won't be a complete prevention.

Absolutely. There is no way genetic engineering as we know it is going to eliminate ALL birth defects... because so many are not genetic in origin.

[Broomstick]

An interesting question is for a late term abortion, say 6-7 months, when would you find it a better alternative to abort than have a child? For instance what if you discover late in the game that the child will have Downs Syndrome?

What if?

Downs isn't always gibbering idiocy - Chris Burke http://155.212.135.143/Articles1.nsf/0/ ... enDocument - for example, is an excellent example of a high-funtioning person with Downs. Disabled, yes, but it's hard to argue his life is meaningless or not worth living. He's a fully sentient human being, which comes through pretty clearly if you've ever heard him speak.

In many ways, the big problem with Downs is there is no way to determine which infant with trisomy 21 is going to be a Chris Burke and which is going to remain a pre-verbal infant.

Nasty Birth defects?

Define "nasty"

There are plenty of people who wouldn't hesistate to abort a child with the defect my Other Half was born with. Plenty of doctors would suggest that same course of action. In the case of neural tube defects you can sometimes make a determination about the most severe cases... but most of them you just can't tell, can't predict the child's future. And it's another one of those syndromes where the causes are mutliple - we know folic acid is critical, which is why women are badgered into eating adequate folate and it's added to many foods these days, but children are still born with this defect to mothers who have more than adequate levels of folic acid in their system. Nor is it genetic - the offspring of people with neural tube defects are at exactly the same risk of that defect as the children of people born without any such defects.

Where do we draw the line and say and this point you MUST have this child otherwise it is immoral?

Where, indeed?

Well... life-threatening defects.... past first trimester... you know, I really don't want a simple cut-and-dried answer to this one. If you're talking about human life - potential or actual - there should be some struggle coming to this sort of decision.

Where quality of life for parent and child will just be horrible.

Who decides what is and is not horrible? The truth is, what people will tolerate varies enormously from person to person.

[wolveraptor]

it has to be more than just a simple cleft palate. no one with any shred of humanity inside them would abort a baby for being ugly, not at 7 months, when you can see the face, and hands and body of a human.

i'm thinking it was an extreme case, with many cranial deformities.

i simply cannot believe that anyone would do this. its infanticide.

[xtashinatorx]

People think disability and are scared. I'm in no way saying that the mother was right. It was a horrible atrocious thing to do and I'm horrified that she made that desicion. But she probably got scared when she heard her baby wasn't perfect. I am a pro-choice activist, but this kind of shit is inexcusable.

[Master of Ossus]

People think disability and are scared. I'm in no way saying that the mother was right. It was a horrible atrocious thing to do and I'm horrified that she made that desicion. But she probably got scared when she heard her baby wasn't perfect. I am a pro-choice activist, but this kind of shit is inexcusable.

No, the DOCTORS made the decision. The DOCTORS should have known how serious/non-serious deformities can be, even if a lay person wouldn't be able to instantly make a decision regarding the process.

I support abortion through the first trimester, and if there is a potential risk to the mother, but this is totally ridiculous. I actually HOPE that the pro-lifers attack on this one, since if this is considered reasonable by the industry then the standards have to be changed.

[Queeb Salaron]

No, the DOCTORS made the decision. The DOCTORS should have known how serious/non-serious deformities can be, even if a lay person wouldn't be able to instantly make a decision regarding the process.

I don't remember reading that the Doctors made the decision on their own. I remember reading that the doctors weren't held responsible for their actions because they acted on good faith, and I assume that they presented the options to the mother who ultimately had the decision as to whether or not this child was to be brought into the world.

Doctors aren't in the practice of saying, "Hey, this kid has a deformity. Fuck the mother, let's abort it."

It WAS the mother's decision, and the doctors obeyed her wishes.

I support abortion through the first trimester, and if there is a potential risk to the mother, but this is totally ridiculous. I actually HOPE that the pro-lifers attack on this one, since if this is considered reasonable by the industry then the standards have to be changed.

The point is that it's not considered reasonable by the industry, but a case like this had never arisen before to my knowledge. Now, obviously, we can say that cleft pallate is no reason to abort a child. But who knows how bad a deformity that child had? And if it is possible for that child to have a very serious deformity, then the mother had a legitimate fear, and a legitimate (if contraversial) reason for wanting the abortion. None of us knows the extent to which this child was afflicted with cleft pallate, nor have we seen a source that confirms how truly detrimental it can be. I would suggest, MoO, that we reserve these kinds of rash judgements until the facts of the case become clear.

[Broomstick]

I'd be happy to reserve judgement until more facts came to light, except that it's unlikely we'll ever hear more details than we have now.

Moving right along, although most doctors wouldn't advocate abortion over what is, these days, a minor defect for anyone with access to reasonable medical care (and there are many charities willing to pay to correct facial deformities in children whose families are poor on top of that), doctors are not, as a group, immune to bigotry. There ARE some rather draconian eugenicists still out there. Along with parents who put the highest premium on looks.

We don't know and can't know all the details of this case... however, it is perfectly legitimate for us to discuss and conclude that cleft palate is, as a general rule, a piss-poor reason to abort.

[Master of Ossus]

No, the DOCTORS made the decision. The DOCTORS should have known how serious/non-serious deformities can be, even if a lay person wouldn't be able to instantly make a decision regarding the process.

I don't remember reading that the Doctors made the decision on their own. I remember reading that the doctors weren't held responsible for their actions because they acted on good faith, and I assume that they presented the options to the mother who ultimately had the decision as to whether or not this child was to be brought into the world.

Doctors aren't in the practice of saying, "Hey, this kid has a deformity. Fuck the mother, let's abort it."

It WAS the mother's decision, and the doctors obeyed her wishes.

A doctor can ALWAYS refuse to conduct an operation if they think that it will cause harm--in fact they're required to by the AMA. Ultimately it is the doctor's decision to go through with any operation, even if the patient must also grant consent. And, again, what sort of a doctor provides an abortion as an option for a seven year old with a cleft palate?

The point is that it's not considered reasonable by the industry, but a case like this had never arisen before to my knowledge.

And the doctors were just given a free pass for performing the operation.

Now, obviously, we can say that cleft pallate is no reason to abort a child. But who knows how bad a deformity that child had?

Who cares? Cleft palate is not sufficient reason to abort a 7 month old fetus.

And if it is possible for that child to have a very serious deformity, then the mother had a legitimate fear, and a legitimate (if contraversial) reason for wanting the abortion.

No, she acted irrationally and the doctors who were entrusted to protect the well being of the child were derelict in their duty.

None of us knows the extent to which this child was afflicted with cleft pallate, nor have we seen a source that confirms how truly detrimental it can be. I would suggest, MoO, that we reserve these kinds of rash judgements until the facts of the case become clear.

We will likely never know as much about the case as we would like. Nonetheless, cleft palate NEVER causes mental retardation--only physical deformity. Surgical corrections are available for even the most severe cases of cleft palate. Treatment options are available for even the most severe of cases. Cleft palate does NOT jeopardize the mother's health. Thus, such a problem is not sufficient justification for aborting a 7 month old fetus.

[UCBooties]

Wow, this hits home for me considering I was born at 7 months. No doubt about it, I was alive at that point. So the thought that they could have decided just a day before that they didn't want me or whatever and could abort me is realy horrifying. Mind you, i wasn't deformed and I don't think my parents would ever have considered abortion unless Mom's life was threatened but it's still realy uncomfortable. I'll still suport the pro-life movment, but this was a terrible thing to do.

[Meest]

I think it was that show the Swan or some Extreme makeover show that they fixed two twins with clef palate. If it's purely cosmetic and there is treatment/fixes for it, wtf is the problem? I find it sad that a primetime TV show handled the problem and these people give up. It's like commiting suicide if someone makes fun of you, just stupid. And it's not even the child saying "I'm different I want to die" it's the parents deciding the child will make them look bad or cost to much to care for, don't breed then.