The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Have you heard about the recent case of a woman having an abortion because she found out that the child would have had a cleft palate and lip?
It's caused something of an uproar because the abortion took place after the 24th week of pregnancy, something that is illegal under the 1967 Abortion Act - unless it is proven that the child will have a serious disability.
A cleft palate and lip is not a serious disability. I know a woman that had a child with a cleft palate. The child had a few operations, and now you'd never know the difference.
Given that this is sometihng that can be corrected with surgery, and it's hardly a new operation, it's hard to see the justification for having the child aborted.
With new technology coming in the field of ultrasounds, parents will be able to see their children in even more detail than before, long before they're ever born. So if we don't like the look of them, or if we think that they might need an operation or two when they're young, can we just get rid of them...? Surely not.
The other question it raises, is whether good looks are now that important in this fickle world, that anyone with any disfigurement is at a serious disadvantage.
Any thoughts?
It's caused something of an uproar because the abortion took place after the 24th week of pregnancy, something that is illegal under the 1967 Abortion Act - unless it is proven that the child will have a serious disability.
A cleft palate and lip is not a serious disability. I know a woman that had a child with a cleft palate. The child had a few operations, and now you'd never know the difference.
Given that this is sometihng that can be corrected with surgery, and it's hardly a new operation, it's hard to see the justification for having the child aborted.
With new technology coming in the field of ultrasounds, parents will be able to see their children in even more detail than before, long before they're ever born. So if we don't like the look of them, or if we think that they might need an operation or two when they're young, can we just get rid of them...? Surely not.
The other question it raises, is whether good looks are now that important in this fickle world, that anyone with any disfigurement is at a serious disadvantage.
Any thoughts?
Page:
Original story ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2367917.stm
Then a Cleric complained that the Police took no action ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk /1/hi/england/hereford/worcs/3272355.stm
(space in that one!)
Then the Cleric gets the right to a judicial review ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3247916.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2367917.stm
Then a Cleric complained that the Police took no action ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk /1/hi/england/hereford/worcs/3272355.stm
(space in that one!)
Then the Cleric gets the right to a judicial review ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3247916.stm
Timmargh wrote:
> *snip snip*!
*Crosses legs*
Ok, in reply to the actual thread. We don’t know the full story and therefore I think it would be unfair to condemn the person for their decision.
However, since when has the world been fair? If it were, Jeffery Archer would have a big wart on the end of his nose.
If this is the reason for her having a child aborted then it is absolutely despicable.
My sister has recently given birth, and having watched her go through her pregnancy and going through the realization that she had a living person growing inside her, (any jokes and I will CS you), I just can’t grasp abortion to be a good thing. Surly it is murder?
I suppose in some situations it’s just not possible to come up with the “correct” answer. If you learnt a baby had a disability that would affect it for it’s whole life, and chose to have it aborted you would never know if they could have lived a happy life. If however you had the baby, and it was miserable in later life then you may feel responsible for causing the misery.
Heavy subject.
> *snip snip*!
*Crosses legs*
Ok, in reply to the actual thread. We don’t know the full story and therefore I think it would be unfair to condemn the person for their decision.
However, since when has the world been fair? If it were, Jeffery Archer would have a big wart on the end of his nose.
If this is the reason for her having a child aborted then it is absolutely despicable.
My sister has recently given birth, and having watched her go through her pregnancy and going through the realization that she had a living person growing inside her, (any jokes and I will CS you), I just can’t grasp abortion to be a good thing. Surly it is murder?
I suppose in some situations it’s just not possible to come up with the “correct” answer. If you learnt a baby had a disability that would affect it for it’s whole life, and chose to have it aborted you would never know if they could have lived a happy life. If however you had the baby, and it was miserable in later life then you may feel responsible for causing the misery.
Heavy subject.
That is absolutely despicable - people like that should be locked up. It's as bad as that woman who purposely took a fertiity drug that would virtually guarantee multiple foetuses, of which she had seven, but they all died one after the other after a premature birth.
When my mum was pregnant with me she had German measles - the doctors warned her that I could be disabled and offered her the chance of abortion. As it turned out I *was* born disabled but - and it's a big but - my disability is purely genetic and isn't connected to anything that happened during my gestation.
I have a 50% chance of passing my disability on to my children which is why I have chosen not to have any ... *snip snip*!
When my mum was pregnant with me she had German measles - the doctors warned her that I could be disabled and offered her the chance of abortion. As it turned out I *was* born disabled but - and it's a big but - my disability is purely genetic and isn't connected to anything that happened during my gestation.
I have a 50% chance of passing my disability on to my children which is why I have chosen not to have any ... *snip snip*!
Lil Ginge wrote:
> I do not agree with abortion at the best of times
That confused me a little.
> I do not agree with abortion at the best of times
That confused me a little.
Good grief!
meka this is a horrible horrible thing. I do not agree with abortion at the best of times and this is just another reason adding to the already disheartened approach on it.
There is another reason I strongly hate abortion. Without going into detail a very close person to me may not be alive today due to it. The doctors after a scan had seen the baby and the fact the baby had very long curled toes - because of this simple fact they strongly advised the Mother to abort the child due to this childs 'disability' in which they thought this was a sign of. The Lady did not want to abort the baby on the grounds that it might not be handicapped and even if it was it is still her child in which she loves. The Child was born - premature and nearly died but that was a completely seperate complication.
Now the Child is as normal and strong and happy as ever - just with some curly toes.
Dispicable
meka this is a horrible horrible thing. I do not agree with abortion at the best of times and this is just another reason adding to the already disheartened approach on it.
There is another reason I strongly hate abortion. Without going into detail a very close person to me may not be alive today due to it. The doctors after a scan had seen the baby and the fact the baby had very long curled toes - because of this simple fact they strongly advised the Mother to abort the child due to this childs 'disability' in which they thought this was a sign of. The Lady did not want to abort the baby on the grounds that it might not be handicapped and even if it was it is still her child in which she loves. The Child was born - premature and nearly died but that was a completely seperate complication.
Now the Child is as normal and strong and happy as ever - just with some curly toes.
Dispicable
From what I heard she has two other kids (both with problems), one of which have Downs Syndrome.
Her brother (I think) has a child with Downs Syndrome too.
But I'm not quite sure how she's going to use the above as an excuse for the abortion.
Her brother (I think) has a child with Downs Syndrome too.
But I'm not quite sure how she's going to use the above as an excuse for the abortion.
From what I heard she has two other kids (both with problems), one of which have Downs Syndrome.
Her brother (I think) has a child with Downs Syndrome too.
But I'm not quite sure how she's going to use the above as an excuse for the abortion.
Her brother (I think) has a child with Downs Syndrome too.
But I'm not quite sure how she's going to use the above as an excuse for the abortion.
thats absolutely evil. I bet the woman was one of those who spends hours applying inches of foundation and 'acheiving perfection' as such.
Doctors should have refused this. It's really sad :-(
Doctors should have refused this. It's really sad :-(
Have you heard about the recent case of a woman having an abortion because she found out that the child would have had a cleft palate and lip?
It's caused something of an uproar because the abortion took place after the 24th week of pregnancy, something that is illegal under the 1967 Abortion Act - unless it is proven that the child will have a serious disability.
A cleft palate and lip is not a serious disability. I know a woman that had a child with a cleft palate. The child had a few operations, and now you'd never know the difference.
Given that this is sometihng that can be corrected with surgery, and it's hardly a new operation, it's hard to see the justification for having the child aborted.
With new technology coming in the field of ultrasounds, parents will be able to see their children in even more detail than before, long before they're ever born. So if we don't like the look of them, or if we think that they might need an operation or two when they're young, can we just get rid of them...? Surely not.
The other question it raises, is whether good looks are now that important in this fickle world, that anyone with any disfigurement is at a serious disadvantage.
Any thoughts?
It's caused something of an uproar because the abortion took place after the 24th week of pregnancy, something that is illegal under the 1967 Abortion Act - unless it is proven that the child will have a serious disability.
A cleft palate and lip is not a serious disability. I know a woman that had a child with a cleft palate. The child had a few operations, and now you'd never know the difference.
Given that this is sometihng that can be corrected with surgery, and it's hardly a new operation, it's hard to see the justification for having the child aborted.
With new technology coming in the field of ultrasounds, parents will be able to see their children in even more detail than before, long before they're ever born. So if we don't like the look of them, or if we think that they might need an operation or two when they're young, can we just get rid of them...? Surely not.
The other question it raises, is whether good looks are now that important in this fickle world, that anyone with any disfigurement is at a serious disadvantage.
Any thoughts?
Page: