You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Current Events Thread
I'm really torn on this. My main concern is quality of life, and there are plenty of things I would agree to abort a baby. Down syndrome makes me feel really bad, because it seems like you're doing it out of embarrassment for yourself and not so much concern for the child. I've heard many women say they'd abort a down syndrome baby, fwiw.
It’s far more than embarrassment. Having a child with special needs, specifically that of down syndrome, affects every single family members lives. It can send you into bankruptcy. The rates of divorce between parents and special needs children is sky high. Having a child with special needs can ruin you.
And that’s because of how this country is set up. There is no support system in place for special needs children. They get the bare minimum of care and that’s the best we offer them in this country.
Re: Current Events Thread
Having a special needs kid gets you all kinds of financial help, so you’re wrong there. It’s why there are so many fosters willing to take them… which can be really sketchy. But yes, being a caregiver is emotionally and psychologically hard.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Current Events Thread
But yesh, being a caregiver is emotionally and psychologically hard.
That’s where I concluded I’d struggle. If I thought I’d live forever, that’s one thing. With trisomy21, you don’t know how independent the child will be capable of being. And even at the least limited, there’s concern.
A friend of mine’s mom took in a guy named Dustin as a favor after Dustin’s mom passed. Dustin was an adult, but mentally handicapped. Essentially a perpetual 8 year old intellectually. She was close friends with Dustin’s mom, and knew Dustin all his life. They thought they could make it work, but the challenge was too much and now Dustin lives in a home. He has no blood family to care for him, and gets to spend a few days with my friend’s mom around holidays.
I’ve never had a conversation with Dustin on his happiness, but it’s not a situation I’d ever want to put my child or their siblings in should my wife and/or I suffer and early demise. And that’s assuming best case scenario where true independence is possible. A group home, all alone isn’t a situation I could feel comfortable subjecting my child to in his 40s or 50s.
Re: Current Events Thread
Having a special needs kid gets you all kind of financial help, so you’re wrong there. It’s why there are so many fosters willing to take them… which can be really sketchy. But yesh, being a caregiver is emotionally and psychologically hard.
You’re talking about the business of residential facilities and foster care. I’m talking about the biological parents who nine times out of 10 aren’t eligible for that stuff in the first place and wouldn’t monetize taking care of their child. The choice is not an easy one. There is no good option. The choice you’re really making is whether or not you want to be a caretaker 24 hours a day seven days a week 365 days per year for the rest of your life. I’m not sure there is an amount of money that’s worth it and the only reason that you would consider it is because it was your own kid.
The residential facilities are miserable places. On a tiny budget 20 year olds are asked to change the diapers of grown adults and be responsible for administering medication. These people make less than $30k/year
Re: Current Events Thread
Pretty amazing seeing all these clips of Republicans and the judges Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett during their hearings. All 3 bullshitted their way through questions involving Roe v. Wade. They all had their minds made up from the get go.
This might be the gift that swings things back in the Dems direction before midterms. Nothing will get solved from this either and those claiming the moral high ground over this will turn a blind eye to the consequences no matter what they are. I remember explicitly being told by members of this board that what Trump did to the Supreme Court was by the book. I was told that these people were qualified to be in their positions and that nothing of serious substance would be altered. This is just the beginning if you ask me. It's clear no precedent is safe now.
Look at what state Republicans have been doing since Biden got elected. It's not that far fetched anymore that gay rights will be next and anything else involving sex will be next. They keep creeping toward it.
Re: Current Events Thread
You should look into the various state, federal and private help you get for a disabled child. I’m talking about fosters. Yes, there are institutions. And I’m not disagreeing, dude, it’s a hard thing. I’m not opposed to abortion.
Abortion ranks at the bottom of voters priorities. Even those who want to keep Roe actually support severely limiting abortion. This is not the game-changing issue you think it is.
And this is progressive none sense. Roe was always about state vs federal powers. Gay rights is protected under civil rights.
Re: Current Events Thread
Give me a break...all the things in this country that have hid under the guise of state vs federal rights...it's a distraction. This is about the same thing every time, one group of people trying to control another group of people. That's all this is. Ends justify the means. Attacking other people's civil rights will get you a political backing. Nothing is protected in this country because the constitution is interpreted and applied differently to every single individual in this country.
Roe vs Wade was the best we could do to compromise. There is no middle ground on this because of how fundamentally the differences go. The backlash should be that 3 supreme court justices who promised adherence to a long precedent lied to our faces. The backlash should come from the dirty tactics employed to put them there. They rewrote 50 years of precedence because they want to do....do what, exactly? What does this accomplish?
Re: Current Events Thread
You’re bring hysterical. The court case this opinion is based on is literally a state vs federal case. Abortion is still legal, without Roe it will still be legal, but now will be a civil liberties issue. Do you really think conservatives want to have that battle? If what you’re saying is true, abortion would already be illegal right now.
Are you saying progressive judges didn’t say one thing in the nomination process and did another when on the bench?
Re: Current Events Thread
You should look into the various state, federal and private help you get for a disabled child. I’m talking about fosters. Yes, there are institutions. And I’m not disagreeing, dude, it’s a hard thing. I’m not opposed to abortion.
Abortion ranks at the bottom of voters priorities. Even those who want to keep Roe actually support severely limiting abortion. This is not the game-changing issue you think it is.
I just don't see the sense in making abortion a voting priority especially in swing states. I mean abortion won't help lower gas prices, unemployment etc. It just seems like more tone deafness from the Democrats to me.
And this may be opening up a long ago issue but this could all been avoided if swing state Democrats would have voted for Clinton in 2016 or if Ginsberg stepped down earlier.
Re: Current Events Thread
You’re bring hysterical. The court case this opinion is based on is literally a state vs federal case. Abortion is still legal, without Roe it will still be legal, but now will be a civil liberties issue. Do you really think conservatives want to have that battle? If what you’re saying is true, abortion would already be illegal right now.
Are you saying progressive judges didn’t say one thing in the nomination process and did another when on the bench?
Ok ID…and that’s what we do here over and over. We talk about things that don’t matter and we minimize the consequences of everything.
