Dialogue on Downs' Syndrome

Friend (status)

Although disorders such as Down Syndrome, etc, do not make the victim less of a human being, etc, I think people sometimes try to 'overcompensate,' by actually embracing it, and going so far as to call it 'special,' etc. I feel this is quite misguided. Is a person with Down Syndrome a human being? Yes. With a soul? Yes. Is the human life a blessing? Yes. Is the disorder a blessing? No. It is a major obstacle that comes as a result of Original Sin, and Free Will. Modern society goes so, so far to strive for what it sees as the reason for living -"happiness"- that in order to do so, it must either eliminate the negatives, such as killing an unborn baby with a defect, or embracing the disorder as 'wonderful,' 'special,' 'unique.' Does God want us to treat people who are different as lesser beings? Not in the least. But does God want us to view legitimately negative consequences of Original Sin as suddenly a positive thing? No, this is not the Christian way.

NSch

Totally my thought.

Friend

I just thought: perhaps people do this because awareness of these children and perhaps the embracing (which modern society loves), will lead to acceptance, which will lead to less to less unborn babies killed.

MO

Just an fyi, the term "special" when referring to the disabled has a much different connotation. In medicine, referring to a patient case as "special" is (and always has been) shorthand, indicative that it's *especially* difficult or hopeless, not that it's grand or wonderful.

Friend

I understand but some people I think try to pretend that - to make themselves feel better. I do believe in trying to make the best of bad, and trying to have a good spirit about things, but...still. I just saw a blog article about a family winning the trisomy___ lottery.

At the same time, I thought there could be an underlying cause of this...for all one's children to suffer from a chromosomal disorder.

JB

Don't fall into the line of thinking that everyone born with some kind of disease is somehow "cursed by God". It may very well be that He has willed this for their own good and salvation as opposed to the perfectly healthy man born with good looks, things that will more than likely become an impediment to his salvation.

Friend

I don't at all believe that God cursed that person. There is Original Sin which gave us and nature free will, and where there is free will, things can and do go wrong.

JB

How does free will have anything to do with a birth defect?

RC

I saw that blog too. They love their children. They are who they are. Saying they won the trisomy lottery is a way of saying that they love their children and that they are persons worthy of respect, love, and care, as much as they would be if they didn't have Down syndrome.

Friend

Nature has free will. God gave everything (weather, our bodies, animals, etc) a nature and gave that nature free will.

JB

God is the author of human life though; the soul being infused into the person at the moment of conception.

Friend

RC, not in any way condemning them nor disorders. But, just making an observation.

Of course, JB. And I'm not saying otherwise.

JB

Okay, ..., however I point this out because it sounds like you’re saying that some abstract entity with no rhyme or reason known as "nature" has willed that human persons be born with this disease.

Friend

Oh goodness! I would never think that. However, if there was no free will, pregnant women would not be counselled to consume a diet rich in folate in order to prevent neural tube defects. But since our bodies have free will to get sick (based on our free will, as well as the nature of a body), it's a matter of fact that workers on pesticide laden farms will develop health disorders.

[Recommendation implies one has free will to guide one's consumption, but also that the body has little say in what happens if one doesn't follow the recommendation.]

JB

Good points. It also relates to man's free will to be a money-obsessed piece of garbage who has no real concern for the quality of the food he or the company he slaves for produces but only that its sales generate ever-increasing profit margins.

HGL

I met one who was being kept in a kind of mental hospital because he had been "scaring" girls he wanted to sleep with. Cuddly, strong, mentally deficient, not a totally ideal combination.

Now, the way to avoid getting too many is not just murder, it is also simply not waiting too long to get children, the longer a mother waits, the likelier this outcome.

So, if murder is off, young marriages is on, right?

"God gave everything (weather, our bodies, animals, etc) a nature and gave that nature free will."

No, some natures do not have free will.

[When it comes to the Sun, the visible heavenly body has no freewill, probably, but the angel guiding it has, pretty certainly.]

A mother giving (first?) birth at 20 : 1/10,000 Down. At 40 : 1/100.

I cannot recall if the stats were for mothers overall or for mothers of the first child. But the age of the man also contributes : multiply by 1,11 for every ten years a man is above 35.

So, if a girl age 20 got pregnant with me, the chances of Downs would be : 0,0000111, but if she's 40, the chances are rather 0,0111. If I were nine years older, 0,00012321 if she were 20, 0,012321 if she were 40. If I were 19 years older it would be 0,01367631 for a woman age 40 and 0,0001367631 for a woman age 20. And so on.

Note, I have been pretty certainly demonised as wanting to promote abortion of Downs feti, because I have simply stated this.

Update after

posting a link to this blog post under the dialogue as so far extant.

JC

Hans, are you suggesting that women stop having babies at 35 in order to avoid conceiving babies with Down syndrome? Because while I'm totally for young marriage, it doesn't in any way reduce DS rates if the women continue having children until menopause. Of course, the ratio will be lower because there will be many more healthy children in the world if more people began childbearing earlier in life, but it will not reduce the number of DS babies. So I don't really get your point. Are you saying that we should marry as early as possible, have lots of kids, but be sure to stop conceiving once the risks for DS start rising (30/35/40 depending on which stats you are looking at)?

HGL

"are you suggesting that women stop having babies at 35 in order to avoid conceiving babies with Down syndrome?"

No, since women who have had babies earlier:

• have used up fewer good ovula before since they menstruated less and are less likely to hit one of the less good ones
• and give a possible Downs' case a few older siblings too
• and because even at 40 the risk is only 1/100 (overall or for those who have not had children before.

"Because while I'm totally for young marriage, it doesn't in any way reduce DS rates if the women continue having children until menopause."

I think it does, if it significantly reduces menstruations that happen before menopause.

"Of course, the ratio will be lower because there will be many more healthy children in the world if more people began childbearing earlier in life, but it will not reduce the number of DS babies."

See above.

"Are you saying that we should marry as early as possible, have lots of kids, but be sure to stop conceiving once the risks for DS start rising (30/35/40 depending on which stats you are looking at)?"

I think Aristotle made the point that if women marry older men, it may happen conceptions start stopping around then.

But I do not consider this a necessity.

"Of course, the ratio will be lower because there will be many more healthy children in the world if more people began childbearing earlier in life,"

In so far as DS implies any kind of burden, precisely the ratio is a good point, i e diluting them in the healthy children.

JC

Your theory about women having less menstruations before menopause is totally implausible and unscientific. Clearly you are unaware how the female body works (I am a student midwife and am thoroughly educated on the biology of the human body). Doesn't work that way. You are born with all the ovula you will ever have and they age with you. Doesn't matter if you've used 15 and had 15 kids (conceived with every ovulation) or if you've used 250 and had 2 kids, by the time you are 35 all the ones you have left are 35 years old. It's not like you are born with a certain number of "good" and "bad" ovula. That's such a bizarre belief. And most men can father children far into their 60's, so I highly doubt that conceptions will "naturally" stop earlier unless you have 15 year olds marrying 35 year olds. Most normally fertile couples can continue to conceive until the woman is in her mid to late forties.

HGL

"You are born with all the ovula you will ever have and they age with you."

They had the genetic setup from start. How can an ovulum that had a normal number of chromosomes when you were 13 get an extra one of one pair when you are 35?

"Doesn't matter if you've used 15 and had 15 kids (conceived with every ovulation) or if you've used 250 and had 2 kids, by the time you are 35 all the ones you have left are 35 years old."

Ovaries that have lost 250 ovula by menstruations (is that correct maths?) are older ovaries and more exposing the from start less exposed less perfect ovula. And I mean older than the ovaries of a woman same age who has had more children.

"It's not like you are born with a certain number of "good" and "bad" ovula. That's such a bizarre belief."

I think not, that is how I have heard it works.

"And most men can father children far into their 60's, so I highly doubt that conceptions will "naturally" stop earlier unless you have 15 year olds marrying 35 year olds. Most normally fertile couples can continue to conceive until the woman is in her mid to late forties."

Let's say a man stops being fertile at 60 or 65. Let's say a man is fifteen to twenty years older than his wife. Four cases:

• he's twenty years older and stops being fertile at 60, his wife stops getting pregnant at 40;
• he's twenty years older and stops being fertile at 65, his wife stops getting pregnant at 45;
• he's fifteen years older and stops being fertile at 60, his wife stops getting pregnant at 45;
• he's fifteen years older and stops being fertile at 65, his wife stops getting pregnant at 50 (when she would anyway).

Note, I think men of Hebrew stock are less likely to get infertile before 65 and likelier to remain fertile well after it - both Jews and Arabs. I have taken what I think Aristotle hinted at by thinking of Athenian men.

MT

People with Down Syndrome I have seen seem to be childlike in some ways.

HGL

They are childlike. They are even childlike after puberty. It's part of their charm - and of their problem. Meeting them or seeing them is one thing, but taking care of them ... well, I'd like to have a few siblings doing so too rather than be only brother to one.