Bad Parenting 101- "Why I Rejected Plan B After my DIsabled Dughter was Raped"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Disabled people have kids all the time. I'm not saying it's right in these circumstances, but it's not a reason not to have children.

Oh, didn't you get the memo? All the pro-choicers abort their unborn disabled babies. They don't believe that disabled people should be born, let alone reproduce.

I have to assume you are being ironic, since I have a disabled child and am pro-choice, and know lots of pro-choice moms with disabled kids.

Disabled with something that was diagnosed before birth? Or disabled meaning sensory disorders, autism or aspergers spectrum, or ADD type disabilities? You can't know ahead of time if your child is going to have those problems, so obviously people will wind up with those children despite their best efforts to not give birth to a disabled child.

Down Syndrome -- well, 90% of those babies (once the parents gets the diagnosis) are extinguished before birth. Mostly because "it might be too hard or scary", even though those babies were otherwise wanted. Even though those babies are often close to the point of viability by the time the diagnosis is confirmed. Even though there is a very long waiting list of families in the US who would like to adopt a Down Syndrome baby. And, even though they still have to go through something very similar to labor and delivery. It is revolting and demonstrates an astonishing disrespect for the humanity of people with mental disabilities - despite the constant refrain of progressive rhetoric which "celebrates diversity".

*** And yes, I realize there are exceptions and that some people will still choose to keep a baby who was diagnosed with something in utero. *** Clearly this is the exception and not the rule, though.

Source, please. If you don't have one, you have no idea about the rule or exception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"no child conceived in rape is innocent"

As a rape victim myself, I find this statement extremely troubling. Perhaps it was just spoken in anger and pain, but I cannot let it go without comment.

A child is innocent of his or her parents' sins and mistakes. A great deal of evil is visited on innocent children around the world and throughout time due to this mistaken idea that they share the blame for something they did not do.

Should children of rape and incest, when discovered, be executed? What about children conceived in anger, or revenge, or oppression, or dishonesty, or spite? Or should they just be ostracized, hated, and ignored? What about those conceived out of wedlock, or within an unhappy or unbalanced marriage?

No, because they are innocent. They are children.

Those who are unequivocally pro-life believe life deserves protection from the moment of conception (not implantation) to the moment of natural death. So causing an abortion of a newly conceived life is the moral equivalent of executing a newborn because her father was a rapist.

This mother put her beliefs in action. Her daughter agreed with her decision. All of the mother's children are adopted, and her daughter who was raped may have resulted from rape herself. She made her choice, and she made it with love.

The death penalty is a separate issue, because it does not involve innocent life. Saying all children conceived in rape deserve to die is depraved.

For the record, I am pro-life and against the death penalty, and I would do what that mother did.

Question to those of you who 'would do what that mother did'.

Say, your daughter did get pregnant as a result of rape, carried to term and had a child.

Would you want her to keep that baby, knowing full and well that she won't be able to take care of the child properly, or will you recommend putting the child for an adoption?
Or would you raise that kid yourself?

I'm genuinely curious, since I would never do what that mother did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"no child conceived in rape is innocent"

As a rape victim myself, I find this statement extremely troubling. Perhaps it was just spoken in anger and pain, but I cannot let it go without comment.

A child is innocent of his or her parents' sins and mistakes. A great deal of evil is visited on innocent children around the world and throughout time due to this mistaken idea that they share the blame for something they did not do.

Should children of rape and incest, when discovered, be executed? What about children conceived in anger, or revenge, or oppression, or dishonesty, or spite? Or should they just be ostracized, hated, and ignored? What about those conceived out of wedlock, or within an unhappy or unbalanced marriage?

No, because they are innocent. They are children.

Those who are unequivocally pro-life believe life deserves protection from the moment of conception (not implantation) to the moment of natural death. So causing an abortion of a newly conceived life is the moral equivalent of executing a newborn because her father was a rapist.

This mother put her beliefs in action. Her daughter agreed with her decision. All of the mother's children are adopted, and her daughter who was raped may have resulted from rape herself. She made her choice, and she made it with love.

The death penalty is a separate issue, because it does not involve innocent life. Saying all children conceived in rape deserve to die is depraved.

For the record, I am pro-life and against the death penalty, and I would do what that mother did.

Question to those of you who 'would do what that mother did'.

Say, your daughter did get pregnant as a result of rape, carried to term and had a child.

Would you want her to keep that baby, knowing full and well that she won't be able to take care of the child properly, or will you recommend putting the child for an adoption?
Or would you raise that kid yourself?

I'm genuinely curious, since I would never do what that mother did.

I am the PP you quoted, and it would depend on my daughter's wishes, her health and her age, her life circumstances. I would do anything I could to help her and the baby, including raising the child myself. Every option would come with its own difficulties, but every option would include protecting her life and the life of her child, giving both the best life possible.

It's not much different from any tragedy: you pick up your cross and carry it. You don't start executing innocent people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Disabled people have kids all the time. I'm not saying it's right in these circumstances, but it's not a reason not to have children.

Oh, didn't you get the memo? All the pro-choicers abort their unborn disabled babies. They don't believe that disabled people should be born, let alone reproduce.

I have to assume you are being ironic, since I have a disabled child and am pro-choice, and know lots of pro-choice moms with disabled kids.

Disabled with something that was diagnosed before birth? Or disabled meaning sensory disorders, autism or aspergers spectrum, or ADD type disabilities? You can't know ahead of time if your child is going to have those problems, so obviously people will wind up with those children despite their best efforts to not give birth to a disabled child.

Down Syndrome -- well, 90% of those babies (once the parents gets the diagnosis) are extinguished before birth. Mostly because "it might be too hard or scary", even though those babies were otherwise wanted. Even though those babies are often close to the point of viability by the time the diagnosis is confirmed. Even though there is a very long waiting list of families in the US who would like to adopt a Down Syndrome baby. And, even though they still have to go through something very similar to labor and delivery. It is revolting and demonstrates an astonishing disrespect for the humanity of people with mental disabilities - despite the constant refrain of progressive rhetoric which "celebrates diversity".

*** And yes, I realize there are exceptions and that some people will still choose to keep a baby who was diagnosed with something in utero. *** Clearly this is the exception and not the rule, though.

Source, please. If you don't have one, you have no idea about the rule or exception.

It is a widely known certainty that 90% of Down syndrome babies are aborted. "Therapeutic" or "eugenic" abortions are the main reason given for late term (post-viability) abortions. Just read the TTC and Expecting boards here, and you will see countless posters casually referring to aborting Downs babies, as if that is the obvious "solution.". A relative in med school said her professor announced to the class, seriously, that a cure had been established for Down syndrome: abortion!

Google is your friend. There is currently legislation being considered that would require doctors to give an accurate description of Down syndrome, because they are being exterminated. There is no doubt that disabled children are being targeted and eliminated.

The first question my mom would get about my brother at the playground was, "Didn't you screen for that?"

[Anonymous]

It is a widely known certainty that 90% of Down syndrome babies are aborted

Then you should be able to provide some evidence.

[Anonymous]

I am the PP you quoted, and it would depend on my daughter's wishes, her health and her age, her life circumstances. I would do anything I could to help her and the baby, including raising the child myself. Every option would come with its own difficulties, but every option would include protecting her life and the life of her child, giving both the best life possible.

It's not much different from any tragedy: you pick up your cross and carry it. You don't start executing innocent people.

Always a great start to life: being the cross your mom had to bear. Ugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am the PP you quoted, and it would depend on my daughter's wishes, her health and her age, her life circumstances. I would do anything I could to help her and the baby, including raising the child myself. Every option would come with its own difficulties, but every option would include protecting her life and the life of her child, giving both the best life possible.

It's not much different from any tragedy: you pick up your cross and carry it. You don't start executing innocent people.

Always a great start to life: being the cross your mom had to bear. Ugh.

I am a pro-choice poster here but I am disgusted by the sentiments of many other pro-choice posters on this thread. You are twisting this person's words to suit your own agenda...the very thing pro-choice activists are always accusing pro-life activists of doing! She meant there would be difficulties in raising a child born of such a horrible situation, and that she felt it would be her job to fight through those, not that she would view the child as a burden. Shame on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Disabled people have kids all the time. I'm not saying it's right in these circumstances, but it's not a reason not to have children.

Oh, didn't you get the memo? All the pro-choicers abort their unborn disabled babies. They don't believe that disabled people should be born, let alone reproduce.

I have to assume you are being ironic, since I have a disabled child and am pro-choice, and know lots of pro-choice moms with disabled kids.

Disabled with something that was diagnosed before birth? Or disabled meaning sensory disorders, autism or aspergers spectrum, or ADD type disabilities? You can't know ahead of time if your child is going to have those problems, so obviously people will wind up with those children despite their best efforts to not give birth to a disabled child.

Down Syndrome -- well, 90% of those babies (once the parents gets the diagnosis) are extinguished before birth. Mostly because "it might be too hard or scary", even though those babies were otherwise wanted. Even though those babies are often close to the point of viability by the time the diagnosis is confirmed. Even though there is a very long waiting list of families in the US who would like to adopt a Down Syndrome baby. And, even though they still have to go through something very similar to labor and delivery. It is revolting and demonstrates an astonishing disrespect for the humanity of people with mental disabilities - despite the constant refrain of progressive rhetoric which "celebrates diversity".

*** And yes, I realize there are exceptions and that some people will still choose to keep a baby who was diagnosed with something in utero. *** Clearly this is the exception and not the rule, though.

Source, please. If you don't have one, you have no idea about the rule or exception.

It is a widely known certainty that 90% of Down syndrome babies are aborted. "Therapeutic" or "eugenic" abortions are the main reason given for late term (post-viability) abortions. Just read the TTC and Expecting boards here, and you will see countless posters casually referring to aborting Downs babies, as if that is the obvious "solution.". A relative in med school said her professor announced to the class, seriously, that a cure had been established for Down syndrome: abortion!

Google is your friend. There is currently legislation being considered that would require doctors to give an accurate description of Down syndrome, because they are being exterminated. There is no doubt that disabled children are being targeted and eliminated.

The first question my mom would get about my brother at the playground was, "Didn't you screen for that?"

Link to all these studies or even the TTC threads or concede to being a liar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Disabled people have kids all the time. I'm not saying it's right in these circumstances, but it's not a reason not to have children.

Oh, didn't you get the memo? All the pro-choicers abort their unborn disabled babies. They don't believe that disabled people should be born, let alone reproduce.

I have to assume you are being ironic, since I have a disabled child and am pro-choice, and know lots of pro-choice moms with disabled kids.

Disabled with something that was diagnosed before birth? Or disabled meaning sensory disorders, autism or aspergers spectrum, or ADD type disabilities? You can't know ahead of time if your child is going to have those problems, so obviously people will wind up with those children despite their best efforts to not give birth to a disabled child.

Down Syndrome -- well, 90% of those babies (once the parents gets the diagnosis) are extinguished before birth. Mostly because "it might be too hard or scary", even though those babies were otherwise wanted. Even though those babies are often close to the point of viability by the time the diagnosis is confirmed. Even though there is a very long waiting list of families in the US who would like to adopt a Down Syndrome baby. And, even though they still have to go through something very similar to labor and delivery. It is revolting and demonstrates an astonishing disrespect for the humanity of people with mental disabilities - despite the constant refrain of progressive rhetoric which "celebrates diversity".

*** And yes, I realize there are exceptions and that some people will still choose to keep a baby who was diagnosed with something in utero. *** Clearly this is the exception and not the rule, though.

Source, please. If you don't have one, you have no idea about the rule or exception.

It is a widely known certainty that 90% of Down syndrome babies are aborted. "Therapeutic" or "eugenic" abortions are the main reason given for late term (post-viability) abortions. Just read the TTC and Expecting boards here, and you will see countless posters casually referring to aborting Downs babies, as if that is the obvious "solution.". A relative in med school said her professor announced to the class, seriously, that a cure had been established for Down syndrome: abortion!

Google is your friend. There is currently legislation being considered that would require doctors to give an accurate description of Down syndrome, because they are being exterminated. There is no doubt that disabled children are being targeted and eliminated.

The first question my mom would get about my brother at the playground was, "Didn't you screen for that?"

Link to all these studies or even the TTC threads or concede to being a liar.

Not the pp you are quoting. But here is a study
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0223(199909)19:9%3C808::AID-PD637%3E3.0.CO;2-B/abstract

[Anonymous]

Opps, not sure why the link didn't come out right
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0223(199909)19:9%3C808::AID-PD637%3E3.0.CO;2-B/abstract

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Opps, not sure why the link didn't come out right
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0223(199909)19:9%3C808::AID-PD637%3E3.0.CO;2-B/abstract

Couldn't get the article, but I though the abstract was interesting. It doesn't say that 90% of babies with DS are aborted, it says that 90% of mothers who receive a prenatal diagnosis of DS abort. To me that's a huge difference. Pregnant women who wouldn't terminate a pregnancy for DS may be less likely to get amnio in the first place.

It's also interesting to me that, according to the abstract, in the 80's the abortion rate for babies diagnosed in utero with anecephaly was lower than that for DS. There's no question to me that anecephaly is a more devastating condition. I imagine there are probably few women who would terminate for DS, and yet would carry an anecephalic baby diagnosed at the same gestational age to term. I assume the difference is because of how the two conditions were diagnosed at that time. DS was only diagnosed via amnio, whereas anecephaly shows up on routine ultrasounds. Presumably the population who gets each test accounts for the difference.

[Anonymous]

Sorry about not providing documentation for Down syndrome abortion rates--I was at my kids' orthodontist appointment:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/w_ParentingResource/down-syndrome-births-drop-us-women-abort/t/story?id=8960803

Similar numbers in Britain:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6440705/Three-babies-aborted-every-day-due-to-Downs-syndrome.html

The recent federal law, co-sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy and Sen. Sam Brownback, which requires accurate information be given to women undergoing screening:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19548258/

Yes, the 92% figure comes from women who underwent screening and then disclosed their decision to abort. These articles note that the numbers of Downs babies have not fallen as far as the abortion numbers would indicate, because #1. Since more women are postponing motherhood to their late 30s/early 40s, there are more chances for Downs babies being conceived, and #2. Not every woman undergoes screening, and even when screening is done, some Downs babies are not detected.

However, also note the high numbers of chromosomally NORMAL babies who are aborted (late in gestation) under the suspicion they might have Down syndrome. So it is not just Downs babies who are eliminated--fear of them eliminates many more healthy babies, too.

So even as these babies become increasingly capable of long, enriching, loving lives, the assumption that they SHOULD BE aborted is getting further cemented in society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am the PP you quoted, and it would depend on my daughter's wishes, her health and her age, her life circumstances. I would do anything I could to help her and the baby, including raising the child myself. Every option would come with its own difficulties, but every option would include protecting her life and the life of her child, giving both the best life possible.

It's not much different from any tragedy: you pick up your cross and carry it. You don't start executing innocent people.

Always a great start to life: being the cross your mom had to bear. Ugh.

I am a pro-choice poster here but I am disgusted by the sentiments of many other pro-choice posters on this thread. You are twisting this person's words to suit your own agenda...the very thing pro-choice activists are always accusing pro-life activists of doing! She meant there would be difficulties in raising a child born of such a horrible situation, and that she felt it would be her job to fight through those, not that she would view the child as a burden. Shame on you.

Thank you, PP, your interpretation was correct, while the distortion of my words was wildly inaccurate.

I would not see the child as a burden, or a cross. I would see her life as a great gift, an embodiment of grace, a sign that even the greatest tragedies can still lead to redemption, hope, and love.

I would see the lifelong scars from a sexual assault as a cross. I should know. I have never forgotten my sexual assault for one moment of any day, and never will.

The child would be an innocent victim, as the rape victim herself would be an innocent victim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry about not providing documentation for Down syndrome abortion rates--I was at my kids' orthodontist appointment:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/w_ParentingResource/down-syndrome-births-drop-us-women-abort/t/story?id=8960803

Similar numbers in Britain:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6440705/Three-babies-aborted-every-day-due-to-Downs-syndrome.html

The recent federal law, co-sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy and Sen. Sam Brownback, which requires accurate information be given to women undergoing screening:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19548258/

Yes, the 92% figure comes from women who underwent screening and then disclosed their decision to abort. These articles note that the numbers of Downs babies have not fallen as far as the abortion numbers would indicate, because #1. Since more women are postponing motherhood to their late 30s/early 40s, there are more chances for Downs babies being conceived, and #2. Not every woman undergoes screening, and even when screening is done, some Downs babies are not detected.

However, also note the high numbers of chromosomally NORMAL babies who are aborted (late in gestation) under the suspicion they might have Down syndrome. So it is not just Downs babies who are eliminated--fear of them eliminates many more healthy babies, too.

So even as these babies become increasingly capable of long, enriching, loving lives, the assumption that they SHOULD BE aborted is getting further cemented in society.

Oh, and as for links to posts in other threads where people mention aborting due to Down syndrome, I don't have the time or the inclination, but the most recent one I saw was a day, maybe a few days ago, on a thread about conceiving naturally after 40, I believe. A poster said she aborted her first pregnancy because of Down syndrome, but then went on to be "blessed" with two healthy daughters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh wow: found this in one of the comments on Femininiste:

I did some digging. it was quite easy to find out who the family is.
The young woman in question has a facebook page. on the page she complains that her “boyfriend is in jail”. which gives a whole new angle to the story, doesn’t it? this may have been the “older boyfriend” variety of statutory (romeo/juliet) rape and parents are just punishing her , while making a great case for their pro-life virtue.
You’ll note on the mother’s blog that she complains incessantly about how hard this child is to deal with, how glad she is when the child is away at juvie, how much she dreads her coming home.
I think she’d be quite happy for social services to permanently take her on. and it would be so much easier to make that case if daughter is pregnant

The young woman has a facebook page? Other posts (from the mother / author) about her daughter talks about how the daughter stole the family car and totalled it and went to juvenile delinquency center and the mother has been spending tons of time trying to have her daughter committed. She says "limited cognitive abilities." What the fuck? This sounds like a crazy, crazy lie and a horrible excuse for a person. Wow.

The mother has several children, all adopted, all with special needs.

Sometimes the heartlessness on here scares me.

I suppose it is possible she made up the story, but since she is a real person with real children (how do you know her kids' names? How do you know which child was involved?), it would be a quick and terrible lie.

I saw the comments on her blog. Reading them made me believe evil is personal. My God, I am so grateful the Internet was not all-powerful when I was sexually assaulted.

OKay so you read this story and you think *I* am the evil one? Oh my gosh!

This young girl's own mother laments her difficulties with her "difficult" mentally ill daughter for ALLLLL the internet to see, specifically complaining that the authorities won't keep her committed and it's so much trouble to have her at home, for weeks, then "loses sight" of the girl for two days, and then when the girl has been found to have been brutally raped (for an extended period of time according to mom) what makes her want to pass out is the name of the conference center, the mother withholds important medication for her daughter and allows for the possibility that the brutal rape may result in pregnancy and a child (who will be trapped in this insane woman's house unless the authorities get involved, which I am having a hard time understanding how they would NOT) and you think I AM THE EVIL ONE? It is so scary to me that there are people like this woman, and people like you to defend her, out there in this world.

I'm not talking about the mom's decision on behalf of her daughter, per se. Let's just pretend I think it's totally true and went down exactly as she says. Even so, how the hell does this mother, in good conscience, BLOG ABOUT HER DAUGHTERS RAPE as soon as she gets home from the clinic, instead of taking her daughter to the hospital, which the mom says was recommended by the clinic based on the extent of her injuries? And then, days later, she is writing carefree blogs about getting manicures?!?!

if you think the mother did the right thing, why don't you provide us with your mother's name along with other identifying details that will help us to determine who you are? Because that is exactly what the mother did in this instance. She whored out her daughter's rape story to advance her political and religious ideology and to pat herself on the back for "doing the right thing." Do you have a relationship with Jesus? And if so, do you really, really think this is what He would want?

Fine, that mother has the right to make certain decisions for her child (IF this story is true, and IF the child is as severely disabled as the mother seems to suggest, which clearly conflicts with pretty readily available information that suggests the girl is troubled, yes, and maybe has mental illness but is far from having a "limited cognitive abilities" which suggest a much more severe condition!

It is simply stunning to me that someone like this woman was ever allowed to adopt. God, how scary. Honestly she is an argument FOR abortion; on the one hand, you prevent a child from developing from a fetus. On the other hand, you could adopt, but then consider the alternative could be your offspring, once alive, would be brought up in an abusive home with parents who brag about their abusive and scary parenting on the internet, and practically live-blog your violent rape. How do people like this pass adoption screening? I thought it was hard to adopt? I thought there were background and mental health checks for prospective adoptive parents?

This blog has really, really upset me. This poor young girl. My heart goes out to her and I hope she escapes this abusive situation and this abusive mother as soon as possible. I'm praying that the authorities get involved.

Oh, and by the way? I am pro-life!!!

Well, you should be very upset with the Pro-Life machine that fabricated this story.

did you mean to direct this comment at me? After all, aside from the fact that I identified as pro-life, I didn't share with you whether or not I agree with ANY of the tactics of the "Pro-Life machine" (I don't), what my politics are, etc.