LETTERS Baby talk
Sir: Thank you for writing 'All you need is life' (17 June) — and if I too were not an atheist, I would thank God that you were in the position to publish it.
It articulately expressed many of the feel- ings I have for my son, James, now aged 14 months who, like your daughter Domenica, has Down's syndrome. Even more impor- tantly, you raised the issue of eugenics and how the screening process is solely directed towards preventing children like ours being born.
We went through that screening process. Sarah, my wife, had a `positive' triple test that informed us of a 1 in 290 chance of Down's syndrome being present. We were offered an amniocentesis, but declined once we understood the risk of miscarriage involved. In any case, even at that point we felt' the presence of Down's syndrome an insufficient reason for 'termination'. How- ever, there was a discernible expectation tantamount to pressure to pursue this course of action. The pressure exerted was very subtle, very insidious. 'Most people do choose to terminate,' we were told. 'Please consider how it will impact on your lives,' they cajoled. 'Don't worry, we can whip it out and you can be pregnant again in a few months,' we were reassured. We were even offered a late amnio, and implicitly told we could abort at virtually any time. Using every possible technique, the medical establishment, personified by caring doc- tors and nurses, tried to persuade us to `exercise our right to choose'.
Some choices are more moral than oth- ers. The word 'choice' is indeed part of the problem. The liberal establishment will react against any attempt to question one of their central tenets — 'a woman's right to choose'. Perhaps people like us need to try to separate the issue of screening from the broader one of abortion. Or perhaps they are indeed too interconnected.
Either way a stand must be taken.
Peter Totman
26 Derwent Road, Raynes Park, London SW20
Previous page
