This letter writer seems to think that the vast majority of people who have disabled (even severely disabled) children have their lives destroyed and are living lives of quiet desperation:
But what about the greater majority who cannot cope and who have had their lives destroyed by the obligations of looking after an abnormal child, and are existing in quiet desperation?
Care to back that up?
And what exactly is a "destroyed life"?
Are there lives that are hard? No doubt. But does a hard life, a life with suffering result in a "destroyed life"?
I don't think so.
Life is what you make of it, even in the face of hardship.
And even if people lived lives of quiet desperation because they raised disabled children-- why should abortion be the solution? What message does that send to disabled children? "You're a burden and should have never been born."
Even if that is the case, there is nowhere in Canada to obtain a safe late termination.
Untrue. They're just not called "abortions".
This, even though most major fetal abnormalities cannot be diagnosed until late in the pregnancy -- and then it takes time to consider the options.
As a matter of fact, no. Doctors routinely suggest abortion when they discover abnormalities. It's not true that late-term babies aren't aborted for disabilities.
I wish people would do some reseach on late-term abortion before making such ignorant comments.
For more social conservative news check out BigBlueWave.ca
