Minette Marrin has just written one of the most condescending/snarky articles (here) about people with Down syndrome that I have read in a long time. Her beef is with people who call the deliberate targeting of unborn babies with Down syndrome 'eugenics'...such an 'ugly' word, she says. So judgmental. Parents of kids with Down syndrome, she says, say that they have been blessed by their child, but Ms Marrin objects to that, because she feels condemned by their comments. Does anyone else see the irony here? She believes that 'eugenics' is an ugly word, yet she wholeheartedly endorses the abortion of babies based on a diagnosis of Down syndrome. If that isn't eugenics, what is? And if it is ok to abort a baby based on a diagnosis, why is it wrong to call it what it is?
She goes on to say that in her experience, a 'damaged baby equals a damaged family.'I beg to differ. Your experience is what you make it...from what I have seen, the vast majority of families have been changed for the better by the experience of having a family member with Ds. Many of those families have children with significant challenges, but the parents still feel blessed to have the child in their lives.
It always amazes me how people with no personal experience in raising a child w/Down syndrome feel qualified to tell us what it is 'really' like. How they are convinced that we must be either deluded or lying to actually believe that our childrens' lives are worthy, and how much better off everyone would be if we had simply done the 'right' thing and terminated our pregnancies.I am sorry to be so harsh in my comments, but I have had enough of people telling me that my son should not have been allowed to live. I am tired of people pretending that the act of 'termination' they are referring to so approvingly is just a 'choice', instead of the deliberate taking of another human's life. I am tired of people telling me that it is judgmental to use the word 'eugenics' when unborn babies are targeted for extinction based on a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome. And I am especially tired of the smug attitude that it is somehow morally superior to 'support a woman's right to choose' rather than to say, flat out, that the very act of abortion is immoral.


India Knight has written a great rebuttal to Minette's article. It was really refreshing to see how completely India exposed Minette's article for what it is: the musings of a cold-hearted, selfish individual frantically trying to convince her readers(and, I suspect, herself) that it is somehow morally superior to kill babies with disabilities rather than accept these children as a persons worthy of our love and respect.
India's article here:
posted by KathyR