or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Birth Professionals › Downs Syndrome and the Plain Ppl
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Downs Syndrome and the Plain Ppl - Page 2

post #21 of 34
Could you compare them to the Mormon population?
post #22 of 34
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post
I love this quote from the abstract. Doesn't it sound like the provider could find some NEW way of presenting it that would make the termination option more appealing to parents with value systems? Why would they WANT parents to terminate?
Yikes. What a quote.
post #23 of 34
I was referencing the rhetoric of the actual paper. The paper's goal seemed to be to enable doctors to make abortion for genetic 'defects' more palatable for parents of any and all value systems and to match the convinvincing speech to the value system. But my question is WHY would they have ANY stake in whether or not you carry a pregnancy deemed defective to term??? Insurance issues? Just a believe that more invasion equals always better? Clearly this paper seems to come from the perspective that Trisomy parents SHOULD abort and maybe that is why 80+% do, kwim?
post #24 of 34
I could be VERY pro-choice and still be against medical system endorsed/encouraged eugenics.
post #25 of 34
The paper appeared to attempt to study how a provider could craft their presenation style to SKIRT a parent's potentially conflicting value system, and achieve MORE terminations. That is what I am questioning. The paper didn't specify which value system the provider would be trying to skirt (so neither did I), but it did imply that it would be a conflicting one, and that the provider's job would be to reconcile any conflicts so that the parents would be freed up to authorize this medical procedure. :?
post #26 of 34
Originally Posted by MsBlack View Post
The other day, I was talking to an NP who told me that he thought the Amish/Menno populations have a much higher incidence of Downs Syndrome than the English. I have never heard/seen this notion, tho of course I'm aware that the Plain ppl do have a higher incidence of certain genetic issues springing from marriage with close relatives over the generations (recessive trait stuff). And I suppose that considering Plain families are more likely that English to have large families, you would see more incidence of DS just because you see more babies generally. But not necessarily a higher % of DS as the general pop. in a given # of total pregnancies.

Anyone know about this? I will be seeking info at the websites of the 2 clinics I know of that are specially devoted to the genetic disorders of the Plain--but if there are other sources of info on this topic out there, I'd like to hear about them.

I would say ask at the clinics- part of why the clinics exist is to study what happens in a "closed" population - I have read online several things about particular disorders but haven't found info about Down's and the Amish specifically-
post #27 of 34
Thread Starter 
Thanks, mwherbs--for the suggestion.

And others, please, let's stick to the topic at hand--once again, do you have any info/links regarding Down Syndrome and it's comparative incidence among the Plain vs the 'English'?
post #28 of 34
Hello everyone,

Thanks for your patience while we reviewed and edited this thread. I'm happy to return it with the following reminders:
  1. MDC will not host abortion debate or inflammatory language on the topic of abortion from either side:
    We will not host discussions that involve explicit sexual references and are cautious about discussions on volatile topics such as abortion, religion, and race.
    While MDC does not take a pro-choice or pro-life side, it has learned through trial and error that MDC cannot allow discussion on this issue as it is too divisive and controversial. Please remember that terms such as 'anti-choice', 'anti-abortion', 'pro-abortion', 'anti-life', 'killing', etc. are inflammatory and can be seen as baiting which is against the UA. When discussing political policy on MDC, we ask that you please simply use 'pro-choice', 'pro-life' and 'abortion' so that these discussions may continue to be hosted.

  2. I recognize that discussions can become intense, however, pointed sarcasm aimed directly at another member is not permitted per the UA.
    Posting in a disrespectful, defamatory, adversarial, baiting, harassing, offensive, insultingly sarcastic or otherwise improper manner, toward a member or other individual, including casting of suspicion upon a person, invasion of privacy, humiliation, demeaning criticism, namecalling, personal attack, or in any way which violates the law.
    No matter how hot a post makes us, we have to do our best to keep our composure when we reply. Barring that, we need to use the little 'report post' button on the bottom left of a post.

  3. As always, please review the User Agreement and keep it in mind while posting.

Thanks and Welcome Back!
post #29 of 34
I just finished reading the classic text Amish Society by John Hostetter (4th edition), and I believe it may have mentioned something about this. I will check it out of the library again next week and get back to you.
post #30 of 34
I don't know if this is helpful, but I saw a documentary about the research the Amish participate in because they have certain genetic disorders/diseases they inherit as a closed society. They use The Clinic for Special Children. Maybe this link is a place to dig deeper for what you're looking for.
post #31 of 34
Can we please clear up the misconception about screening (abortion) decreasing the population of people born with Down Syndrome.
It is not true! It is an invention of propaganda.

This quote is from the Down Syndrome Research Foundation website http://www.dsrtf.org/about-ds.htm

"About one in every 800 American babies is born with Down syndrome, and it is estimated that about 350,000 people in the United States live with this condition today. There is a false impression that pregnancy screening has eliminated or substantially reduced the incidence of Down syndrome in the population. Despite years of screening, the Down syndrome population in the country has remained stable."
post #32 of 34
Thread Starter 
Thanks shooflymama! I appreciate that.

dewi--wow, thanks for that. I was willing to entertain the notion of screening/ds reduction as I awaited links to real info (it seemed plausible to me), but I'm glad that you cleared that up.

Appreciating all for links and suggestions!
post #33 of 34
Originally Posted by dewi View Post
Can we please clear up the misconception about screening (abortion) decreasing the population of people born with Down Syndrome.
It is not true! It is an invention of propaganda.
There is kind of mixed info out there. I just received this in my emailbox today.

post #34 of 34
I think that prenatal screening has made a definite impact on the number of babies born with down syndrome, but that once those babies are born, better health care is being given to them throughout their lifespan, increasing the likelihood that they will live longer.

This argument is a bit of a statistics game too. You can say that 80% of babies whose mothers have a definitive diagnosis of down syndrome terminate, but that doesn't mean that 80% of all babies with down syndrome are aborted. Lots of women decline prenatal screening for various reasons.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Birth Professionals
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Birth Professionals › Downs Syndrome and the Plain Ppl