Australian couple abandon surrogate twin with Down's syndrome in Thailand

New Posts

  • #81
Charlie09 said:
Who decides which condition is livable and which one isn't? what is pefect? No genetic issues but what about personality flaws like lack of empathy?

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

As far as the who I think it should be the mothers/caregivers decision.

I have seen more then one article in reference to down syndrome and taiwan/taipei

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/11/06/2003576273

The Down syndrome birth rate has significantly decreased with the introduction of screening tests from 22.28 per 100,000 live births in 2001 to 7.79 in 2010, the Taiwan Society of Perinatology said yesterday, urging all pregnant women to undertake the recommended tests.

I know that this has to do with screening and termination but as one article states and I agree with is it's not about termination it's about elimination of a birth defect. I have lots of respect for the folks that are parents to DS children I really do but I personally could not do it. I am not that special parent for a special needs child.
 
  • #82
Cherry said:
I think there will come a time when people stop being bleeding hearts and realize that attempting to keep everyone alive is the wrong thing to do. One day, our resources will be gone. They are already dwindling. If a life cannot be lived to a full extent happily healthy, that's not a life. One day we will be forced to do the correct things, decisions like this and worse. There won't be enough food or room. Defects should not be bred. Not in people, or animals. Defects, whether congenital or not, shouldn't always just be. One day society will Hv to make the right choice, not one that saddles a couple with thousands in debt for so called care. Jmo.
Click to expand...

This idea has actually been trialled..... first in the US...

"One of the methods that was commonly suggested to get rid of "inferior" populations was euthanasia. A 1911 Carnegie Institute report mentioned euthanasia as one of its recommended "solutions" to the problem of cleansing society of unfit genetic attributes. The most commonly suggested method was to set up local gas chambers. However, many in the eugenics movement did not believe that Americans were ready to implement a large-scale euthanasia program, so many doctors had to find clever ways of subtly implementing eugenic euthanasia in various medical institutions. For example, a mental institution in Lincoln, Illinois fed its incoming patients milk infected with tuberculosis (reasoning that genetically fit individuals would be resistant), resulting in 30-40% annual death rates. Other doctors practiced euthanasia through various forms of lethal neglect"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

All of which of course inspired:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_eugenics

... which I need not elaborate on, I think.
 
  • #83
Frigga said:
I have to leave this thread.

I can't imagine what motivates some people.
Click to expand...

I hope MsFacetious doesn't stumble into this thread. Her head will explode. :facepalm:
 
  • #84
  • #85
  • #86
  • #87
I cannot believe what I just read. I thought the fear-mongering in the Brantly case (who is an American hero who deserves the best of care in America) was bad, but this particular thread has topped that by far. Oh my...
 
  • #88
'The Thai surrogate mother of a baby boy born with Down syndrome and a hole in his heart says his Australian biological parents saw him in hospital.

Twenty-one-year-old Pattaramon Chanbua's account contradicts the claim of the couple from Western Australia, who have said they were not told about the baby boy’s existence.

"If they don't know about the twin then they wouldn't be crying the day that they took the girl out from the hospital [and home to Australia]," Ms Chanbua told the ABC's 7.30 program.'

........

'They declined to be interviewed but, while acknowledging a fraught surrogacy process in Thailand, denied any knowledge of a son.

"We saw a few people at the hospital. We [didn't] know who the surrogate was - it was very confusing. There was a language barrier," they said.'

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-...mum-says-parents-saw-baby-in-hospital/5647440

I was thinking that as baby Gammy appears to be much loved - and loves being where he is in return - and as over $100,000 has now been raised for him, he's far better off staying with the only family he's ever known. The money will ensure he gets adequate food and shelter.

The only thing that could be done for him now perhaps, is to ensure the best medical treatment. Which may be in Australia? I think it would be disasterous if Gammy was separated from his family though and the bills for transporting the whole family there and back, arranging accomodation, then the treatment, would punch a big hole in what's been raised so far.......

It looks like equal measures of cash and compassion are going to be needed, to ensure this little one's medical and emotional needs are met. I really hope they are. There's just something about his little fingers that tugs my heartstrings.....

Photo Link: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/pa...a-thai-surrogate/story-fnet085v-1227012256324
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    93.8 KB · Views: 184
  • #89
  • #90
  • #91
  • #92
Charlie09 said:
Who decides which condition is livable and which one isn't? what is pefect? No genetic issues but what about personality flaws like lack of empathy?
Click to expand...

I think the bio parents should decide. The goal should always be to produce healthy viable intelligent children, and if parents understandably do NOT want to have offspring with severe disabilities it should absolutely be their right to choose, if the baby is not capable of surviving without serious medical intervention at birth then the parents should also be able to decline any medical intervention.

I also believe that the parents should be responsible for the costs associated with raising their offspring.

There was a time when having a mentally or physically disabled child was seen as a very sad and unfortunate thing, now it seems folks are PROUD to let the world know they have birthed children with all sorts of genetic problems, they feel it is some sort of great accomplishment that they must share with everyone that will listen!

Not everyone thinks it is a great thing, far from it.
 
  • #93
Omg. I seriously, seriously doubt that any parent whose child has birth defects/genetic illnesses WANTED their child to be that way.

Some folks just do better with it than others do. Or would.

And with all the struggles they live with, including a-holes telling them they ought to have aborted, who can blame these parents for wanting to talk about their child in a positive light?

I talk about my genetically a-ok child that way, and no-one thinks ill of it. God alone help them, if they did. And then posted it where I could see.
 
  • #94
Ausgirl said:
Omg. I seriously, seriously doubt that any parent whose child has birth defects/genetic illnesses WANTED their child to be that way.

Some folks just do better with it than others do. Or would.

And with all the struggles they live with, including a-holes telling them they ought to have aborted, who can blame these parents for wanting to talk about their child in a positive light?

I talk about my genetically a-ok child that way, and no-one thinks ill of it. God alone help them, if they did. And then posted it where I could see.
Click to expand...

If people are using a surrogate, I fail to see why they can't decide what they can and can not handle while raising a child.
Which is why it's very important that the bio parents and the surrogate are on the same wavelength about abortion.
Although the surrogate mother in this case claims she was asked to have an abortion during the sevenths months of pregnancy (not fourth). That would be too late to have an abortion even if she did believe in abortion. Which she says she doesn't due to her religion. Seems like picking a surrogate who doesn't believe in abortion is a big mistake.
Especially if these couple were the older parents (as they were described). Age increases chances of birth defects.
I am surprised the embryo was not tested for genetic defects before implantation.
 
  • #95
jjenny, if the parents are wholly unwilling to take responsibility for their offspring, no matter what health they have, then yes I agree, it is not a wise decision to choose a surrogate who would not follow wishes to abort.

In this case, however, I am wondering how ethical the agency is through which the surrogacy was organised, and whether the genetic parents realised the surrogate was indeed opposed to abortion. It seems like one of those issues that ought to be on the first page.
 
  • #96
Supernovae said:
Shock new development:

http://www.9news.com.au/World/2014/08/04/20/53/baby-gammy-dad-has-sex-convictions

This story could run and run.
Click to expand...

zwiebel said:
New information has come to light tonight on the couple at the centre of the baby Gammy surrogacy scandal.

'The man in question has a conviction for indecently dealing with a child under the age of 13.'

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/world/2014/...y-dad-has-sex-convictions#0UWurxWXx3SkfwHe.99

Gammy may turn out to be the lucky one. In my opinion.
Click to expand...


This is very disturbing. The man is a convicted pedophile!! What to do? :thinking:
 
  • #97
I think it depends on Australian laws? Is he allowed contact with children? His conviction was a long time ago.
 
  • #98
PrimeSuspect said:
This is very disturbing. The man is a convicted pedophile!! What to do? :thinking:
Click to expand...

Holy cow.

As if things weren't twisted (and controversial) enough. So the agency not only neglected the abortion issue, they also failed to do a basic background check (or just didn't care). That's pretty shoddy.
 
  • #99
BBM
'The couple have not been identified but live in Bunbury, in Western Australia. They are expected to release a statement through a lawyer some time in the coming hours.
Gammy's mother has threatened to sue the family, claiming that the children’s biological father, who is in his 50s, had visited her after she gave birth.
He had only bought milk for the girl, she claimed, and ‘never looked at Gammy’.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...deny-abandoned-baby-theirs.html#ixzz39R8obPqT
 
  • #100
Does anyone know if this presser from the couple's lawyer actually took place today? It's nearly midnight in W. Australia now, so it should have been reported by now, I'd have thought.

'Media is building at a house in South Bunbury in Western Australia's South West which is believed to be the home of the biological parents of baby Gammy.'

Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/b...nbury-home-20140804-100cm3.html#ixzz39RApgZGh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

zwiebel
Australian couple abandoned surrogate twin baby boy in India despite warnings
Replies
3
Views
1K
mikkismom
mikkismom

Members online

... and 94 more.
Total: 2,279 (members: 95, guests: 2,184)

Online statistics

Members online
95
Guests online
2,184
Total visitors
2,279
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
632,810
Messages
18,632,000
Members
243,300
Latest member
DevN
Back
Top