Comments on: Should Downs Syndrome Be Cured?

By: buraianto

buraianto — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:08:01 +0000

Penny, I agree that medical problems are more important to cure than cognitive impairments. However, it doesn’t have to be one or the other, or one after the other. It could even be that research into treatments for the cognitive impairments aid research into treatments for medical problems, or vice versa.

By: Penny Green

Penny Green — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 09:06:08 +0000

Firstly they aren’t actually talking about a cure for Down’s Sydnrome it’s a possible treatment realting to the problems in cognitive ability related to having Down’s Syndrome.

Secondly, perhaps they should focus more on treating and curing the medical problems associated with Down’s Syndrome. You don’t die from having this genetic condition but you can from some of those medical issues.

For instance about 47% of people with Down’s Syndrome are born with congenital heart defects, many of which require surgery to prevent early death, but even given the current high success rates of that surgery, it is not 100% and the child and family have to go through a very emotional procedure. It would be much better if we could eradicate these problems which I’m sure everyone would agree with before we get into whether or not we should treat cognitive ability.

By: buraianto

buraianto — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 06:43:18 +0000

What would Jesus do?

So let’s imagine Jesus comes down and walks around. Someone with some condition, or someone with a child having the condition runs into Him. What would Jesus do? Or what would the person ask for?

Or, imagine a person with such an affliction dies, and goes to heaven, and is about to be resurrected. God says, “OK, time for your perfect body.” The person says, “I want to keep my __________ condition.” Does God say no, or allow it?

By: anon

anon — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 20:02:16 +0000

I think DS is unique in that it makes the children almost like cuddly teddy bears, so its hard to see that as “damaged”. If they were physically crippled and required tons of medical treatment, surgeries, and had a risk of death, etc, I don’t think these parents would be singing the same tune. My son was born with a genetic disease that YES, made him damaged, and guess what? He died from it. I would’ve chosen to have it fixed in a heartbeat. I think its selfish for people to consider leaving people with disabilities if it could be fixed.

I’m sure a large part of it is the whole “People with DS were the most righteous in Heaven” dogma. No, people with DS have it because thats what happened to their genetic code. Or the justification that people try to use “Oh, your family needed to learn something from this”.

If I was pregnant with a DS child, I would keep it. No questions asked. I definitely think it can be a learning experience and we can find good in the experience. But if I could cure it before the child was born? Yes, of course I would.

By: Clark

Clark — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:03:44 +0000

I think the problem is that we tend to see “acceptance” in opposition to “wrongness” or “flawed.” Which, when you stop and think about it is an odd thing to think. But it is so ubiquitous I bet there’s some cognitive structure that leads us to that way of analyzing.

By: jks

jks — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:42:29 +0000

Having a child with a disability changes how you view things. You can’t help it.
My child has a language disorder. When I read something online written by someone with Asperger’s who didn’t want to be cured, who objected to the idea that it was something that needed to be cured, it really changed things for me. We need that idea out there, we need the discussion about what things need to be “cured” and why we want things to be “cured.”
I appreciated the perspective and it gave me something I needed. I needed to look at my son and no longer see him as a kid with something wrong. Something to wish away.
Something was wrong and I had to work very hard every day to help him. It is a huge burden on a parent.
I’m not saying I wouldn’t give him the cure if I had it. I would. I work hard every day to help him so I technically I am working on the “cure” the slow way.
I just wish I could write down what I mean. How I realized that my parents loved me and were perfectly willing to accept me with my weaknesses. How necessary it was for me to view my son in a new way.
It helped me see that my son’s challenges would influence what became his strengths. Would I take those away from him too?
There is no alternate space time continuum.

By: Clark

Clark — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:06:09 +0000

Susan, couldn’t we simultaneously say the world would miss out on a lot if the poor were removed from it and therefore we shouldn’t help the poor?

By: Jacob J

Jacob J — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 00:30:56 +0000

Susan,

It is not passing judgment on the children, but on the condition. It is most certainly a judgment that it is better not to have Down Syndrome than to have it. I would vigorously defend that judgment. However, it in no way says that the child is less valuable as a person. In fact, it is because we value and love the child that we want the best for that child (i.e. for the child not to have Down Syndrome). I don’t think a single person would choose Down Syndrome for themselves if given the chance.

By the way, I didn’t mean to imply that the only people to share her view would be those that are emotionally invested. There are diverse reasons for people to be wrong about things. (edit: please read that with a wink and smile)

Ardis makes a good point about primitivism. Some people want to make sure that we don’t bring modernity to people living in the stone ages. I have no problem with a person who, like Thoreau, goes into the woods because they wish to live deliberately. However, to the fullest extent possible I think we should give people to the opportunity to embrace or reject modern medicine, education, and technology for themselves. To do otherwise is to value the primitive way of life over the actual people forced to live according to that way of life.