This sad tale is quite thought-provoking:
Internet stars Jesse Ridgway, 33, and Ashley Ridgway, 31, announced that they had made the ‘difficult decision’ to terminate their pregnancy earlier this week, two months after learning their unborn child had Down syndrome.
“As for us, we made a difficult decision that we believe in the long-run will be beneficial for our family,” Jesse wrote in a series of Instagram Story. “Thankfully, we had a choice. “It will take a little time to move on, but we are excited to try again in the future and hopefully have a better outcome,” he added.
Just a week earlier, the pair had shared a YouTube video showing the results of an amniocentesis test, which screens for birth defects and chromosomal conditions. In the clip, the couple sat on the floor and viewed the test results in real time, which revealed markers consistent with Trisomy 21, medically known as Down syndrome.
Ashley broke into tears as Jesse explained that the couple had previously discussed terminating the pregnancy if faced with such a scenario, a decision they later confirmed on Wednesday.
Jesse, posted a series of emotional Instagram stories saying the couple had decided to have an abortion, describing the decision as “not made lightly” and “extremely traumatic.”
I’ll say it is. I can’t actually think of anything more gut-wrenching than this one, but when all is said and done, given what they were going to face, I can’t say I disagree with what they did.
And before I start getting screamed at, I note the many similarities between this decision and the decision to turn off life support for a terminally-ill relative — the latter of which does not seem to engender much of a response from the All Life Is Precious Brigade.
Remember too that I am a bitter foe of abortion-on-demand, except in cases like this.
I once knew a guy — back in South Africa, where abortion was very much illegal — whose wife had had a Downs Syndrome baby. The poor little tyke lived until age 10, and then died from the usual issues associated with this unhappy circumstance. Several years later, I asked him about his feelings on the topic, and his response was blunt and to the point.
“It was hell,” he stated bluntly. “Absolute bloody hell: for my wife, for me, and for little Eric. Ten years of exhausting hell. As much as we tried to put a cheerful face on it, I think my wife cried herself to sleep every night for five years. And when Eric finally went into the hospital for the last time — we knew his condition was terminal — we crucified ourselves with our guilt because we were feeling nothing but relief that his, hers and my hell were finally coming to an end.”
Of course, in the case of our unhappy couple in New Jersey, there have been the usual issues from the lunatics:
The news immediately triggered a wave of online backlash. A day later, the pair revealed that their inboxes were being flooded with ‘hate and vitriol’ over their ‘impossible decision.’
Jesse, known online as McJuggerNuggets, said that since sharing their abortion, they have been exposed to a “deeply disturbing” side of humanity. One comment left under their YouTube video read: “Genuinely the most dystopian and disturbing video I’ve seen on YouTube. Truly evil. Four months.” Another said, “Hitler thought those with disabilities didn’t deserve to live either!!! You should be sterilized.”
All those comments, of course, are coming from people who’ve never had to face anything like the choice — if it can be called that — that these poor kids have had to deal with.
If I can fault the Ridgways with anything, it’s for putting the whole ghastly episode on the Internet. Had they just had the thing done, then put up a brief, sorrowful post that they had lost the unborn baby, nobody would have been any the wiser and everyone could just have carried on.
But this unhealthy urge to share with strangers the most intimate details of one’s life is total poison — as Jesse and Ashley Ridgway have discovered. I only hope that he never has to use the gun he keeps next to his bed, because that would just add to the tragedy; although getting rid of some screeching fanatic would not be that bad an outcome, because they live in Noo Joizee the consequences of ending that asshole’s life would be more punitive than ending the life of their unborn, unhealthy baby.
There are no winners in this horrible story, and the maniacs who insist on piling on are just adding to the tragedy.
Kim, as the old beer commercial went, “I love you man”. I have been reading you for years agreeing with you, being educated by you. But this, I am in total disagreement. Is this really different than ancient societies inspecting newborns and throwing those off a cliff if deficient by their standards? Can you explain the moral difference? Can you say where the quest for perfection will end? Also, I have met families with down syndrome children. The children are happy, and an example of loving in ways we all should be. They have value, like all children. If one is going to be that selfish and uncaring, don’t conceive!
“Is this really different than ancient societies inspecting newborns and throwing those off a cliff if deficient by their standards? Can you explain the moral difference?”
I can’t. It’s all barbaric. The problem is that in ancient times, a “deficient” child was seen as a burden on the family — and the tribe — and could in fact be a dangerous liability. Remember too that back then it was all about protecting the “bloodline” — just as Hitler suggested — so any aberrant children were seen as dangerous to that, too.
That’s not the case anymore. What hasn’t changed is that while the “danger” to society and “bloodline” is no longer an issue, there is a real problem with the family. There are numerous case studies where “normal” children felt neglected by their parents because the parents were too busy devoting most of their time to looking after the Down baby.
Looking after a profoundly-disabled child is not some game; for some people it’s too much, and having seen some of this, I can’t fault them too much.
Like I said, it’s a horrible situation, and I even hesitated to talk about it today because I know how raw people’s emotions can be when addressing the topic.
But there it is.
The problem that a lot of people do not realize is that Down is a spectrum.
The child can be happy and near-normal.
The child can be profoundly retarded.
I have met three Down people – one in his 30’s was a grocery bagger, married to a Down woman and very happy.
One was in her teens – the daughter of a friend. Very happy but dependent on the friends family for support.
One was also in her teens – an emotional cripple. The parents were loving and supportive but she was scared of everything. The parents had to give up their lives to care for her. Their lives were monopolized.
Amniocentesis is just a go/no-go test. It doesn’t tell where the fetus is on the spectrum.
I would agree with abortion in this case.
Compare and contrast: Granted it was 18 years ago and a somewhat different time. Remember the absolute hell Sarah Palin caught for going through with the birth of Trig? That was I would guess largely politically driven, but she was poleaxed not only on the InnerTubes but in Big Media for not doing “The Right Thing”, that being in the minds, such as they are, of the Kommentariat.
I’ll be blunt.
I agree with their decision to abort. There is no honor in bringing life into the world that will always be a burden on themselves or someone else.
I also think their decision to yak-yak about it on the internet for attention is perverse. Do what needs to be done and move on with your life. If you need to talk it out, that’s what religious institutions are for.
I agree its a horrific situation all the way around, but don’t make it worse by smearing it around on a public forum.
Exactly. As a lawyer, I have learned to (mostly) keep my mouth shut about things. There’s no benefit in spraying your private agonies all over the Internet.
The first rule of PR is deny everything admit nothing, usually paraphrased as when you fuck up, shut up. I get some considerable pleasure from the thought of these two heroes announcing their saintly decision to the world, expecting showers of glory and being pilloried instead.
No burden is too heavy for he who does not carry it.
In the Eighties, my dad had a couple of Hemorrhagic strokes and some Alzheimer’s. Over the course of seven years he forgot where he was, who we were, forgot much of his past thirty years, couldn’t recognize us, or his wife, once he left the car in the alley, locked up, engine running, and insisted he had put it in the garage. He eventually lost his swallow reflex and inhaled the milk Mom fed him. He got pneumonia from that and we took him to the hospital, where the pulmonologist said that pumping out his lungs would be painful to him and he would not be able to understand what was going on. He also said that he’d be gone in three days. I had a moment of shock at that announcement and my thought was, in spite of the seven years of severe decline, “So soon?” He was put into a hospital room. At first he had to be tied to the rails but he settled down, and we sat vigil while he struggled to breathe. He was a tough old guy as he slowly ran down. My brother’s girlfriend was there, and he would say to Dad, “Dad, let go.” She had not lost anyone closer than a grandmother she visted every couple of years and thought that was terrible (fifteen or twenty years later, when her own father died, she said she understood finally.
During the seven years we essentially put our lives on hold, doing what we could to the house, caring for it maintaining it as best we could. The seven years took their toll on us. I would not wish them on anyone.
In the circle of adults my parents knew, one couple had two boys who had some kind of brain tumor that rendered them blind. Their doctor recommended they not have any more children, so they eventually adopted a girl.
I have every sympathy for this couple, no one should think their decision was not made without uncounted hours and days of agony.
When it comes to the legality of things like abortion and euthanasia it’s always a difficult decision to demarcate where legal ends and illegal starts, and stay humane at the same time.
Using either as a way to get rid of “undesirables” is wrong, obviously, but where do you draw the line.
A pregnant woman not wanting to bring a potentially heavily deformed child, or a child with potentially very serious mental health problems into the world is understandable, and laudable. But then again, how far do you extend that?
Used to be people were forced to get abortions because they would be “bad parents” or “in no position to bring up a child” because of their race, religion, or financial situation.
Is that humane, either for the parent or the unborn child? Some would say so.
Same with euthanasia. The hospital where my mom resided when terminally ill with cancer decided several times during her stay that “she’d be better off dead”.
They did the same when she was in ICU with an MRSA infection.
In all cases we had to fight to stop them pulling the plug, so to speak. Then when she really would have been better off dead (severe chronic pain, bedridden, couldn’t relieve herself without help) they insisted on keeping her alive…
As they did with my father. He’d signed and notarised documents stating when and under what conditions medical care should be stopped and euthanasia performed (it is legal here and hospitals should honour such requests) but the hospital refused.
He suffered gravely, mentally and physically, for another 7 months before the staff of the nursing home he ended up in honoured his requests and gave him a dignified end to his life.
I’m not opposed to abortion for medical reasons, but is not wanting a child because it might have a disease a valid medical reason? And if so, what diseases would qualify for it?
It’s best be very well regulated or you will get cases where abuse of the law happens at both sides. Children considered “undesirable” being aborted for minor potential “flaws” and children with real problems not being aborted because the doctor you approach is opposed to the very idea of abortion and would rather see the mother die in childbirth than the child being born seriously handicapped.
Read about this test just yesterday, went looking for the link and couldn’t find it.
The article said the test was only accurate about 10-20% of the time. It was centered on a couple that had the test that showed the kid would be damaged and they went ahead with the birth and the kid was OK.
The “cost” of the damaged kid is forced on all of society and I have a problem with that.
The test doesn’t have an 80-90 percent failure rate, but I know a several people who have ignored the test and had non-Downs kids. It is hard to determine a failure rate now since so many positives result in abortion.
Most of Europe has “eliminated” Downs. I’m sure a lot of this is that older people are getting “fixed”, but it is also because of rampant abortions at positive test results.
I’ve seen this argument play out before, with one side always going on and on about how kids with Down Syndrome are “gifts from God”, always happy, a true blessing, etc. and so on. Ok, yeah, I’ve met a few like that. I was also neighbors with a couple that had 3 Down babies in a row. Their lives were pure hell. Two of the three were so retarded that they’d never be able to live any sort of normal life – the youngest was completely non-vocal (except for random screaming at all hours). I don’t know why they continued to have kids after the first one, but whatever. Their lives 100% revolved around just being caregivers for their retarded kids. Forever. Nothing else was possible.
Sorry, not sorry. I’ll freely admit I could not be able to handle that. It’s bad enough raising normal kids. My only concern is that the test is not really accurate – but that’s the true hell of it, right? All of a sudden there’s a roughly 30% chance the kid is going be a Down Syndrome, and you have no idea of how bad it might be. Do you roll the dice? Or call it quits? I’d be inclined to abort and move on, not sure my wife would agree. Of course, I also wouldn’t put my life on display like some internet reality show either, but that’s just me.
But for all the true believers out there claiming that Down babies are a true gift from God? They can all go fuck themselves. I’ve seen the bad side of that next door and it’s hell.
For all those people who think that having severely retarded babies is a gift from God, the usual rejoinder is: “And what kind of spiteful God would inflict that upon you?”
And I’m absolutely not going to continue with THAT discussion.
Generally the Downs individuals you see on the Internet are the lucky 15%. Mildly ID and are able to live “independently” with help from family and the government. With considerable training and family/state support, as many as 30% of those with DS can eventually live and travel independently, work (with supports), and learn to read/write reasonably well. There is also a small percentage (~2%) with a milder form called Mosaic DS who exhibit more-or-less normal intelligence. However, Downs is a spectrum and outside of the lucky ones are those who need constant and often expensive care.
I don’t blame the couple for terminating the pregnancy. I do find it disgusting that they made a public spectacle of it. To me, that act indicates that are not qualified to be parents of a “normal” child much less one with the special needs typical of a DS child. A child is not a fashion accessory or a prop for your You Tube career. Frankly they strike me as the kind who would exploit a “normal” child and try to trans it for clicks.
Fuck ’em.
Don’t let an extra chromosome get you down.
Ultimately the choice needs to be let to the individual parents. Doesn’t matter if you agree with their call…it’s theirs to make, not yours.
If we let the state, at any level, decide what is and is not a valid reason to abort you risk ending up with coercive eugenics or a total ban on abortions for any reason…all depending on what political party was in charge.
Likewise at the other end of life, voluntary euthanasia. The individual must be the one to decide.
You object? Then don’t do it.
If you feel you must, disassociate yourself from those who have if that makes you feel better. Freedom of association and all that.
My late wife and I refused the test for both kids. The admitted false positive rate is 0.2%, and they explicitly say they aren’t actually testing for DS, just elevated risk. Having seen the US healthcare system deliberately botch my whooping cough test to keep numbers down during a local outbreak (which the newer vaccine kept us alive but little else), I am not willing to trust that 0.2 percent is anywhere close to accurate. After all, these are people who think there should only be 500m tops, and most of us aren’t members of that 500m….
We were almost faced with the decision back in 1988. A second test refuted the results of the first and we went on to have the child and we are glad we did. There is no doubt we would have aborted the pregnancy if the second test had been positive. And it would have nobody’s f**king business but ours.