Comments on: Brave, Wonderful or Just Plain Irresponsible?

By: HulaGirl

HulaGirl — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:05:53 +0000

My sentiments precisely. Well said!

By: praveen

praveen — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 06:55:25 +0000

hi britgirl, firstly, nice work u have going here.
secondly, on whether an individual is brave wonderful or plain irresponsible, is all a matter for individual opinion. in truth, each individual changes world history, in ways that are unfathomable.. genetic lack in one area is no disqualification for birthing the next einstein or music genius or mathematical prodigy.. Love ,is finally what Really matters in life.. who are we to judge with our limited understanding of creation ???

one feels that one should be loved, honored and treasured for what one is.. just that..

and maybe your blog vision being to put things just like it is , should promote more objectivity than promote discussion on such lines.. think that your blog will achieve much more and help a lot of people …

By: roxetterachel

roxetterachel — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 19:05:46 +0000

It is so self-centered and selfish to feel it necessary to replicate oneself in the first place. Adding in health complications that put the baby and mother in danger is even more ridiculous. I have no sympathy for these women, rather harbor feelings of disgust at their plights.

By: SwissBarb

SwissBarb — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:45:01 +0000

I think this is shockingly selfish and irresponsible.

By: Kat

Kat — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:31:51 +0000

No problem. My cousin is interesting in that she became deaf at five, after an illness (just what, I don’t know). So she had learned to speak, although her speech is not great, and she could lip-read so well that we often forgot she was deaf when talking to her – and wondered why she didn’t answer when we were turned away from her.

She did learn to sign, but not until later in her childhood. She’s now married to a “normal” guy, and has two kids of her own. I don’t know what she does for a job, as she moved to South Africa with her man, and I only hear about her through family updates.

As I said, you don’t miss what you don’t know, but to go from being normal to suddenly deaf must have been terrifying for her. But she coped wonderfully, as I’m sure you do … you both have my admiration.

By: Robin

Robin — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:41:33 +0000

I believe people need to be responsible when taking on having a child and this does not seem responsible. Like myself, I don’t want kids but then also my husband doesn’t have a job and I work 35 miles away from home, I would never do it, even if I changed my mind because it’s not a situation I would want to bring a child into.

By: og217

og217 — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:33:06 +0000

Sooo glad that us tax payers get to finance this woman and her defective litter. I think its safe to say she doesn’t work and her husband makes a pittance, so the financing burden of this repulsive -looking “gift to the world” is on us, eh? Sooo not what I asked Santa to bring me for Christmas – a mutilated dwarf popping out more of the same. Ack.

By: Christine

Christine — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 01:50:07 +0000

Kat:
I see your point totally. I am severely hard of hearing and I cope in the hearing world, too. Your cousin is like me, right? He lives among hearing people and does not sign? I don’t sign — I lip read and I work and live with hearing people.

People who live in Deaf Society mostly spend their lives living/working/being friends with/married to other Deaf people. They don’t consider themselves disabled at all — whereas I do. They actually don’t feel their Deafness restricts their human experience in any way. There language is no less a language than ours — English in this case.

More can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/yayvmhg

Sorry to hijack the thread — I just don’t think I explained Dead Culture well at all.

By: Lee

Lee — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:18:06 +0000

As others have said, I can’t help but think that this woman’s desire to appear “normal” was a huge component in her wanting to have children. I would think that this man wanting to have children with her made her desire even more intense. Like many women, she may have succumbed to being chosen to be the mother of a someone’s children. It’s done now, but I hope for everyone’s sake that because he is studying to become a minister he will stand by the family he helped to create and not piss off at some point and leave this woman in the lurch with her disability and her disabled child/children to care for. Sigh.

By: Lee

Lee — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 21:38:48 +0000

In Greece, it’s not a state law, it’s a restriction imposed by the church. The Greek Orthodox church will not marry them or grant them a license to marry because if they have children (which many people in their culture do as they are very family oriented) their child/children may die an early death. If two people who both carry the gene knowingly choose to have children outside of marriage granted by the church and their child dies young–that’s on them. The state can’t legislate against stupidity (as the saying goes, there is an ass for every seat) and since it is a question of morality/ethics and because apparently most people in that culture want to marry in the church, by the church imposing a test requirement and refusing to grant a license to a couple who both carry the gene they increase awareness of the disease. Those who plan to reproduce will at least think twice. In my friend’s generation (he is 43) he is not aware of anyone in his circle who reproduced when both carried the gene. However, he had a classmate whose parents unknowingly both carried the gene (they married before testing was mandatory) and their son (my friend’s friend) who developed the anemia died when he was 16. I’m veering well off topic here, but I’ll wrap this up by saying my feelings are the same about IVF– it is a question of morality and ethics. Doctor’s take an oath to do no harm and by implanting fertilized eggs that result in the likes of an Octo-mom or a soon-to-be geriatric mother, they are most certainly knowingly creating a high-risk situation for the child, which as individual physicians they have the right to refuse to contribute to. The child may be born healthy (or not) but at some later date either end up a young orphan or a ward of the state, due to unfit parenting. I would hope that someone intelligent enough to be granted an M.D. would posses the capacity for critical thought and the ability to perform scenario analysis to realistically assess the situation–since obviously some parents do not. But, apparently, at least in the U.S., most physicians won’t turn a patient away, because at approx 25K a pop their priority is the worship of the almighty dollar. They’ll refuse to perform abortions on moral grounds, but they won’t refuse to impregnate a 60 year old. By all means, rock on….

By: Miss Fanny

Miss Fanny — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:46:23 +0000

… as my husband used to say, when he was trying to talk me into considering a baby: ‘Think of the benefits you can live on…’

Jeez, what a story this is. It’s tragic that it’s real.

By: Soldatka

Soldatka — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:44:15 +0000

Here’s a thought: what do they do in Greece if two CF people carrying the thalassaemia gene want to marry? Or two carriers who don’t want to marry have a kid anyway?

Not getting at you…just wondering how far the state should be allowed to intervene. It raises some interesting questions.

By: Loinnir

Loinnir — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 07:10:40 +0000

And what about Dad? How much does a “trainee priest” make, anyway? He’s as much to blame for this disaster-in-the-making (or should that be “disaster-in-the-made”?) as she is. Thoroughly irresponsible, the pair of them.

By: Mia

Mia — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 04:36:52 +0000

She already has two children. What does she tell herself to justify doing this when it would be such an added strain on the family and possibly take the mother of her current two children away from them? Her first duty is really towards them, and she needs to be wise, realistic and responsible. She needs to be able to be content with what she has because having two children means that she ‘has the world’ already.

By: Lee

Lee — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:18:08 +0000

Forgive me for exaggeration. No one ever does that here do they. I happen to feel very strongly about people making ethical and responsible choices around reproduction(I’m dreaming). While I’m sure a person’s desire to have children can be very intense, my equally strong feelings about my child-free state does not carry the potential to cause someone harm.

What I should have said for the sake of clarity was genetic disease as opposed to gene. I certainly don’t define suffering as poor eyesight (which I have and attribute to too much reading) and I don’t consider being less than average height being a negative thing (and there is a big difference between being “short” and being two feet tall). The point I was trying to make and perhaps didn’t do very well (I’m not a genetic scientist and don’t know how many genes are required for each illness to manifest), is that I personally would not want to pass on a genetic disease (as the woman in this story has done) that I know could cause physical or mental suffering should it manifest in my child. I have a friend who is a genetic counselor. She meets with parents who have a history of either mental or physical illness somewhere in their family tree such as Bi-Polar, Parkinson’s or Huntington’s, certain types of anemia (to name a few). She discusses the odds of them passing the illness down to their child (children) and how that would/could manifest in their offspring. While they are not forbidden from reproducing those that choose to do so, know that if the genetic illness, which they carry, turns up in their child, that child will suffer. I personally, would not choose to reproduce in that situation and would question the thought processes and ethics of those that do. Another example of a genetic disease is Mediterranean Anemia. In Greece, two people who both carry one gene for that type of anemia are forbidden from marrying and everyon in Greece must be tested for the disease prior to granting a marriage license.

My overarching point was/is that people’s wants and desires to reproduce should not supersede the right of a child to be born free from disease if it can be prevented, which in the case of this woman it most certainly and obviously could have been.

By: Dorian Gray

Dorian Gray — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 16:15:09 +0000

If you haven’t seen the follow up to it, she’s had the baby prematurely:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1233841/The-worlds-smallest-mother-2ft-4in-Stacey-Herald-gives-birth-THIRD-baby-just-THREE-years.html

By: ellie

ellie — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 16:10:35 +0000

Incidentally, that is what every pregnant woman, ever, looks like to me. Just one giant, bloated belly, and a self-satisfied grin atop it. Ugh.

By: Kat

Kat — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:56:18 +0000

I don’t know that I agree with this. I have a deaf cousin, so I know they cope admirably, but life is tough enough for most people without any sort of disability. I guess a child won’t miss what it doesn’t know, but it certainly restricts their human experience. Is that fair? Given the choice, what do you think the child would choose?

I can’t agree more that rolling the dice on a genetic disorder is cruel. If you truly loved and considered the child, why would you deliberately inflict pain and suffering on them? To make you feel better? To vaildate your existence in some way? To have a soul mate? All I hear is me, me, me… and that to me, is incredibly sad.

By: ellie

ellie — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:55:35 +0000

I don’t trust myself to expand without the use of harsh expletives so I’ll just succinctly answer your question: selfish and irresponsible. Like, beyond the pale.

By: Soldatka

Soldatka — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:48:29 +0000

We’ren all mixtures of genes, and to say that we wouldn’t want to pass on a gene that would cause a moment’s suffering is exaggeration, in my book. My parents probably passed on a gene for poor eyesight, which makes me fall downstairs even without the assistance of alcohol. They definitely passed on genes for being short. My father may have passed on a gene for being prone to heart disease but we don’t yet know whether that has popped up in my genome too. A gene that protects from one disorder (malaria) can cause another (sickle cell anaemia). The gene for CF also affords protection against typhus. And so on.

I would not want to deny someone’s feelings of wanting a child, which, I am sure, are every bit as strong and genuine as my feelings of NOT wanting to do so. However, bringing a child into the world with a SEVERE and heritable genetic disorder isn’t a kindness, in my book, especially if it is possible to screen for such a disorder. Once your child is here, it also isn’t smart to risk your life and possibly leave that vulnerable child motherless because you want another difficult and life-threatening pregnancy.

She seems to have a point to prove about transcending her disability by becoming a mother of a large family. Perhaps she would prove her point better by being the best mum she can be, i.e. not a dead one. We all have our limitations. Sometimes the wise choice is to accept we have them and make the most of what we do have.