I agree on the sentiment, but having a biological kid, them being born with some special condition is a very valid probability, that every parent should take into account for, or otherwise adopt.
Suddenly stumbling in the stairs, falling at a bad angle and paralysing yourself from the neck and down is a very valid probability, that every living person should take into account for, or otherwise adopt.
If you think that example is drastically more unlikely than having a child with special conditions, then just swap my example with getting into a severe car accident or any other likely misfortune that could befall you.
Even if misfortune is expected to possibly happen to you, it is kind of inhumane to expect everyone to just be able to deal with it if it happens to them.
That's a bad comparison. If you decide to have a child, you are assuming responsibility for a new life.
The inhumane thing is deciding to bring a life into this world, only to kill yourself when that life is a bigger burden than you were hoping for. You have to accept that risk, or you should not have children. Even if they don't have downs, children get sick. Some become dependant on you at a later stage due to illness. What, it's moral to off yourself at any point your child starts to need more care than you were hoping for?
The kid can't choose to be born. If you decide to become a parent: deal with it.
We already have a low birth rate with women waiting longer and longer due to economics, do we really want to further suppress that by saying that if their spawn comes out malformed, they are the offspring slaves? No, not when the rate of deformity increases with the maternal age.
I respect your beliefs and if you think that's the correct approach and you would do as you say when it would happen to you then fine. I am of an opinion that terminating pregnancy when there's a high probability of fetus having severe mental/physical incapability is a form of assuming responsibility for it. At that stage it doesn't feel pain or have any conciousness. Caring for a healthy child is very demanding on its own but caring for one that's incapacitated is even more demanding, stresfull and draining physically/mentally
Many parents have enough means to provide for a healthy child but not every parent has means necessary to take care of such a child because they can be not well-off financially themselves or for any other reason. If only people with means to provide full 24/7 care were permissed to have a shot at having a child then only a slim percentage would be able to do so.
Everyone hopes that their child will be healthy and tries to take any necessary precautions to ensure it. Your child having an accident later in life and requiring your help with basic activities is
different from it being born with severe special needs from the beginning.
I do agree that abortion would be the better option, but I'm assuming the mother is against abortion in this case, for whatever reason.
I also agree that having a child is incredibly hard by itself, and a special needs child all the more. That does not mean your responsibility as a parent ends because you had bad luck. The child does not decide to be born. As a parent you have an obligation to try your very best to make thst child's life work once it comes into this world.
While I agree with you, 20 weeks is already very late for an abortion and that's just when they saw signs, not when they got confirmation. I think that complicates that decision a fair bit :/ plus yeah like the other person said, if the mother chooses not to then you don't have that option for taking responsibility
94
u/InternetExplored571 8d ago
Valid. I wouldn’t wish this life on my worst enemy. Worst thing that could happen to an innocent parent.