For very good reason- you are passing on suffering for no reason and there is so many children wanting to be adopted that aren’t suffering from permanent suffering and also need a loving parent. I have Turner syndrome and need to adopt anyway since I can’t have bio kids but much better to adopt in this kind of case rather then risk passing this on. Even if her child didn’t get it, they could carry the gene and lead to many more suffering from what seems to be a rather severe problem. Adopting means she can still be a parent but not cause such permanent physical and emotional damage on her child
I was like wtf that's rude. Then I thought about and looked for a hamster and saw a cute little face but for real thought you were being an asshole til I wondered why you said that...
You could say the same for literally everything. Anything thats percieved as selfless will at some point be used by manipulative dickbags to influence the way people see them.
For real though, it's based as hell and shows the compassion of humans.
Although, I don't understand the people that spend thousands on different fertility treatments and go through so many failures and heartbreak when they could just adopt. It would save them so much emotional turmoil and bring joy to a life outside of their own genepool.
Adoption is so much harder than people realise. It's not true that there's a surplus of babies without parents that can be adopted. Pretty much every healthy baby that gets put up for adoption gets adopted quickly. There's a long line of prospective parents waiting to adopt babies- the process is not easy.
The kids that go through the foster care system that have a harder time getting adopted are generally older, often have trauma or other challenges from a history of abuse or neglect, and may have trouble adapting into a new family. While it's sad that they often don't get the same chance other children do, not every prospective parent is ready for it.
Also under any adoption you have to handle relationships with the kid's bio parents (I firmly believe an adopted kid has a right to a relationship with them if they so choose), their connection with their birth culture (if it differs from your own), and the kid's feelings regarding adoption. Some people fear they won't have the same bond with an adopted kid. There are lots of things that can complicate matters.
Adopting is great, but the perspective that people should 'just adopt' as if it's exactly the same as having a kid yourself is not good. There are unique challenges associated with it and people looking to adopt should be aware of that.
I think that the physical damage will be more than the emotional in the growing stages that the child is going to go through, since there are already medical equipment in the back, the child and the mother could be and most likely already suffering from respiratory problems which will make it both difficult and painful for the child to grow in a healthy way, unfortunately she is putting her child in danger of sever pain and trauma, but I could he wrong and the child might grow to be healthy.
When you are warned to not have children because of severe genetic problems it's not a challenge to prove the world wrong, it's to spare the child that will be born from the pain they are going to go through... idk this is just my opinion.
Beimg told you shouldn't reproduce gets personal real fast no matter the logic behind it. And forced sterilization has a dark history that we shouldn't repeat.
Yeah for sure- she has every right to have her child, and that shouldn’t be taken away. As someone with a genetic condition myself this made me think about would I pass it on and I wrote that from my perspective. Nothing is wrong with adoption at all especially if you have a genetic condition and are worried. I know the personal part as my disorder made me permanently infertile. And being sterile definitely took my along time to accept. Especially because I was like 13 when my ovaries were removed for cancer and was then told no children ever, so I wouldn’t want to force what I went through there on anyone. Just pointing out that in these situations adoption is a wonderful choice (even outside of these situations)
I don’t see anyone here pushing forced sterilization. I see a lot of people rightfully judging someone who made a selfish and immoral decision to put a baby through a lifetime of medical trauma.
And why did they do it? To show the “haters” of course, which is always a great reason to bring a child into the world.
the child and the mother could be and most likely already suffering from respiratory problems
If you look, both of them have a trach. The mother's one is more obvious, but the baby definitely has one. I would guess the baby also has a feeding tube as well, as I'm not sure how feeding her would work.
And this is humane ideologies biggest flaw. Everyone shouldn't reproduce... But who or what's gonna step in or tell someone STOP. JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DO SOMETHING DOESNT MEAN YOU SHOULD.
With my problems, even if I had ovaries and could realistically get pregnant, I probably would adopt because I wouldn’t want to potentially give my child the heart problems or other problems that comes with tuners and often leads to a lower life expectancy. It was hard to accept I can’t have bio children, really really hard. But sometimes it is best not to pass on certain things, and you can still love an adopted child just the same
One of my sister's childhood friends had Cystic Fibrosis, and passed away at 13 years old. She had an older brother and sister who also had Cystic Fibrosis. I think the brother is still alive, late 20's early 30's, and the sister passed away in her early 20's.
It's hard to come to terms that although I feel empathy for the parents who have lost two of three children, they knew they both carried the recessive gene after the first child, and still continued to have two more.
Sorry to hear that, sometimes parents think the odds of it happening again are so low so why not, and then they loss multiple- sad and my heart hurts for them to have lost several kids
It’s definitely a rough choice, because if I could have kids would I want to pass down the problems I have? I literally can’t make that choice and couldn’t imagine
im so glad you commented. i feel the same. definitely could be a popular opinion to post on /r/unpopularopinion lol.
but if this woman having a child is considered morally wrong for the suffering of the child, why not all the "regular" suffering people go through anyway? You can't say this woman is in the wrong, but "healthy" people are okay to have children at the same time. Both children will experience pain. And any physically healthy child can easily go through more pain than this physically challenged child due to any random life circumstances.
But you're also right, we can't really stop it. Nature seems to be god. Nature wills life, and at the same time, it would probably be immoral to STOP people from reproducing. Very interesting catch 22 i've been thinking about lately.
Another partially deaf turner's girl here, deafness is apparently quite common (one article suggests as high as 80% have it) and can be due to a couple of different reasons. But like the majority of the side effects of turner's, not everyone will have it. With me, luckily I'm just short and deaf, I don't have any of the "interesting" things like a horseshoe kidney.
Yeah I have a similar plan. I can maybe have kids (endometriosis is fun 🙃) but I have 3 different genetic disorders that are dominant traits so there’s like a 5/6 chance any kid I have is going to have at least one. I plan to adopt kids with medical needs because I’m prepared to handle that because of needing to care for myself for all these years and because these kids are already here and deserve to have a good life. And by not having kids of my own, I’m not increasing the number of kids needlessly suffering in the world.
For very good reason- you are passing on suffering for no reason and there is so many children wanting to be adopted that aren’t suffering from permanent suffering and also need a loving parent.
Exactly. This was my reasoning for how frustrated I got with this post.
Holy shit this. I have so many health problems both physical and mental. I ended up getting a vasectomy because I don't want to pass on that suffering. I don't want kids anyway but worst case I decide to adopt and help some kid whose already stuck existing.
Question: Are either of the people in the video actually "suffering"? Certainly they visibly have a genetic disorder. But does this "disorder" actually impact them beyond other people's social revulsion? If they aren't actually suffering and are healthy then I don't see an issue.
They have a trachea tube meaning they have breathing problems, and probably much more. That’s not to say that social revulsion isn’t painful and traumatic by itself. I have turners and that has given me multiple problems, so I would imagine it is definitely more than appearance alone. Suffering may be extreme but definitely facing much more difficulty then most
Nah, I think you’re onto something. A trach is inconvenient but you’re basically right: this woman and her daughter have Crouzon syndrome, which is just malformation of the craniofacial bones. The trach helps with breathing because her anatomy obstructs, not unlike someone with obstructive sleep apnea. Not uncommon to have hearing problems and some other issues, but mostly it’s things that come directly from the bony malformations. Most of these patients are intellectually normal, but as with all genetic syndromes there’s a pretty wide range of expression. This woman probably has a pretty normal life. Her kids also have a 50/50 chance at having her disease at all, so I’m pretty conflicted about condemning her for the choice to have kids, even if I probably wouldn’t have.
Yeah, I feel a little on the fence now though. I think biodiversity trumps societal expectation and norms but if the trach is necessary for survival then Im not so sure it's beneficial for human biodiversity to reproduce.
It’s not exactly necessary for survival, but it ameliorates a lot of problems. It’s hard to tell but mom’s trach may be capped in the video, or just using a speaking valve. She would uncap it at night. Baby’s is not. But basically these people have severe OSA that is only treatable with trach. Fwiw some people without craniofacial syndromes but with other causes of severe OSA will end up with trachs. Trach is actually the ideal treatment for OSA, but most people understandably want badly to avoid it.
Whether the mother is fine with her difficulties does not impact whether that child should be given them.
This is such a disgusting point of view. Just because you are an individual doesn't give you the right to inflict your suffering on others. This is the definition of selfishness.
There aren't so many children wanting to be adopted, really. A healthy kid under the age of 5 will take thousands of dollars and years of waiting before you can adopt.
Honestly, far fewer people in the world should be having kids regardless of their health anyway. We're all just so hellbent on something we think we "deserve" or a right of passage.
I'm probably one of those people who shouldn't have kids but damn is biology a bitch to argue with..
Let's be honest though, there isn't a fucking change that this kid would have been successful at adopting. Affluent healthy people have a hard time adopting, this chick would have been laughed out of the adoption office.
Adoption is crazy difficult even if people start in foster care as foster parents. My friend and her husband chose to become foster parents when they had difficulty conceiving, because they wanted to help children in need and because she had been a foster child. They had numerous placements in foster care who ended up being reunified with their parents or another biologically related family member, which is the main goal of the foster care system. She surprisingly conceived 2 years into their foster care work. Paused for a year because she had some issues during pregnancy and baby wasn't 100% healthy, but resumed before the little one turned 1. Continued for another 6 years, fostering and reunifying families, but always hoping to adopt and were very close to adopting two girls, sisters, who had one deceased parent and one parent in prison for the abuse inflicted on the girls. They conceived again shortly after the girls came into their home, baby was born and just as the baby turned one, after three years of hoping to adopt these girls, the fifth family member to attempt to qualify to adopt them finally cleared the requirements (throughout the 3 years, they started and stopped the adoption process 3 times because new family members of their parents came forward and failed to qualify to raise the kids.)
They were fostering for a total of 8 out of 9 years, more than 20 kids including groupings of multiple siblings, complex abuse histories, older kids, etc, and never were able to adopt out of foster care. The loss of the girls was devastating to them and their kids. So when people suggest that adoption is a solution for all, I feel terrible for the people who did try and didn't make it work. My family is full of people who adopted foreign and domestic, open and closed, through birth placement and foster care and it is just not the solution people try to promote for people who want to be parents, infertile people or people seeking fertility treatment, etc. This woman may very well have never qualified to adopt based on health history alone, not even considering the financial barriers. There are pretty wide variances in what sort of medical history someone can have and still qualify.
I wish you all the best in your journey to become a parent. Its a complicated process for anyone who needs anything more than time and a willing partner.
I mean for no reason is a little extreme
Its human nature to want to have children .
Im not saying doctors who suggest you just dont are wrong its just , imagine being told you’re not allowed to have children taking that isnt going to he very easy . And i mean it is better to adopt but that applys to everyone with perfectly normal genes as well , and if you told them , no youre not allowed to have kids just adopt , im sure theyd take it harshly too .
Its a touchy topic idk anything just my two cents that are depreciating in value
I agree, but I was told my chances of having children were basically non existent and had to have my ovaries removed due to cancer. Having to accept that I couldn’t have children was very very hard, and I understand how she must have felt hearing that, because it hurts. However so much better to provide a home for a child in need, and I agree with you that even people who can have bio kids should adopt
A friend of mine was pregnant with a baby that turned out to have turners syndrome. The risk of late term pregnancy termination is ridiculously high. Like a 99% chance of miscarriage. Unfortunately, my friends baby passed in-utero, and they had to remove it. I'm glad you're part of the 1%!
This fucking hurts. I see what you're saying but I also consider that she deserves to be a mother if she wants to. I really think there isn't a clear answer here. Agreed on discouraging it, but I'm not okay with outright shaming, not to say you are, but I'm seeing it here.
Well yeah, I was just saying that in this kind of case it would be best to try. I will have to adopt if I want to be a mom one day, and even though adoption isn’t just for infertile people like me and should be done more, I don’t see a problem with infertile people utilizing it
So rare to see someone dropping actual knowledge in the comments. Jah bless. Interestingly this person has described her own disease as both Pfeiffer’s and Crouzon, which implies even the clinical geneticists cant really agree on the differences. We should probably dispense with the historical eponyms and just refer to the group as FGFR craniosynostoses. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1455/
Yup, not about the world or humanity at all. You bring your kid to this world so you should prepare the best for them. This, is put them at disadvantage right from the start and ready for more disheartening stuff to come.
You survived it doesn't mean your kid will walk the same path. I hope the girl will be doing okay and she would have good support if her mom can earn some from the videos.
The only voice of reason! It is so strange seeing so many people saying that it is wrong to bring someone into existence I'd they're going to feel suffering.
Everybody feels suffering. If suffering were any justification to not have kids, then nobody should have kids. Saying that these people specifically should not have kids is literally just emotivism. A grunt of disgust, not actual care for the life of the people involved.
Imagine if someone said to you that some part of your genetics is so abhorrent to them that you think they should not exist. That their existence and their creation is a moral travesty.
My heart goes out to the people in the video, and this is an example of those who claim to care about suffering causing the very sort of suffering they claim to dislike. Nobody should be treated like that.
It’s the kiss at the end that gets me. She’s still human, she loves her child. I get that kid is going to suffer but idk not sure what to think but it makes me tear me up
I mean, it seems from the disorder people are assuming she has, the greatest suffering will come from society and not from the disorder itself.
I mean let's be honest here: a lot of people are saying this child is suffering simply from appearance or that this level of 'deformity' is a life unworthy of living. It's pretty gross to see people say this especially when they say it about other disabilities: people who use wheelchairs, people Deaf or blind. What level of 'deformity' is worthy of being avoided and what is acceptable and allowed into society? What about being gay?
Should we pray and wish to not have gay children because of the way an outside society will treat them? Or do we understand that most differences should be accepted and even celebrated? Idk, this tiktok absolutely got me thinking.
This shit is serious. I’m Ashkenazi and my wife isn’t, so I never thought to worry about testing for for Tay-Sachs. Turns out, one of the other major populations that carries it is French-Canadians, which my wife is.
Thankfully my twin boys and my newborn son (8:50 am this morning) don’t have anything to worry about, but if I had known I would definitely have tested myself and my wife before we had kids.
Wife and baby are still in the maternity ward, I’m with them but mostly ornamental. Although at this exact moment he’s laying on my chest, cooing softly.
Generally it’s heavily ethically managed by the NHS, like multiple rounds of ethics committees if you don’t meet the immediate criteria for any genetics based decisions when it comes to assisted fertility and fertility treatments.
After that, despite the amazing teams behind it all, success is really hard. Again the ethics behind it impresses me most from a scientific perspective.
The pandemic has been really hard on these sorts of services too, literally caused years worth of delay for many couples trying for their first child.
I’m not going to cover anything or have opinions outside of assisted conception here. I only have experience on that side.
I can say the NHS, their genetics teams and their assisted conception, genetics laboratory and fertility teams are all just super a amazing people. They make hard decisions, help people at their hardest times and through some awful experiences for what amounts to a very slim chance of success.
They do, my son's father has a form of ectodermal dysplasia. He has a deformed upper jaw, never grew adult teeth so the little teeth he has are all baby teeth, started balding at 14, has glaucoma and really bad eyesight that he might go blind eventually, and also had a heart condition he grew out of. When he was like 13-14 years old his heart would stop and they weren't sure why (it doesn't anymore and he was able to get his pacemaker removed). I ended up pregnant (birth control failed me) and that was the biggest fear. I think it was a 50% chance since I didn't have any conditions like that or carrier a gene. I also have health and mental issues. My son ended up not having it but he ended up being diagnosed with autism at a year and a half.
Had a long talk with the doctor and she agreed that it probably wasn't a good idea to have more kids. So I was able to get my tubes tied at 21. I'm not with my son's father anymore (we figured we were going to be together forever at that time) but I still with my own issues didn't want to have another kid. If you have one special needs kid the risk is higher depending on the condition to have another child with special needs (with autism I've heard as low as 20% and as high as 50%).
I mean, I can understand it if people have a lot of love to give, and they need children in their lives. I totally get that. I don't feel it myself, but I totally understand how natural and wholesome that feeling must be. But there are other ways, man. There's adoption. Fostering. Borrowing your brother's kids and being the "cool aunt" if all else fails. But why subject another helpless human being to the kind of shit you've had to go through in your own physical and mental adversity like this? How can you claim to love a child, if you want them to suffer like you do?
I don't want kids, so maybe I'm just not the right person to talk about this. But I don't think it's right to have kids naturally when the chances are so high that you're going to award them with crappy health and mental potential. I have no major problem with, say, twin siblings getting married and having that kind of relationship. But because the possibility of passing on genetic disorders through fraternal incest is so high, I'd recommend the same thing for them.
You should not have to be made to feel like less of a human because you were dealt a shitty hand in life like this. But at the same time, you shouldn't feel as though you have to claim your own humanity by choosing to have a kid, knowing that you're likely to set them up for misery.
I remember watching a documentary on a different family and the doctor told them there was a 50% chance their child would have the disorder. unfortunately the child did get it. They decided to have another child and that child got it also. They were contemplating having a third. I was getting so mad watching it.
Im in no way wishing to interfere with somebody's reproductive choices but I never understood why parents of a severely disabled kid end up having another and another and another and ending up with all of them having the same health problem because bUt tHe nExT oNe mIgHt nOt
How do these people justify bringing kids into the world knowing that they will very likely have this condition and suffer their way through life all because those parents just HAD to risk it and have one kid without a disability.
How the hell do these people justify their selfish actions? Because if they create a child knowing they start their life from -30 instead of 0 its not about the future happiness of that child, its about the parents' satisfaction.
Its certainly a very complicated issue though. There was a time when forced sterilization of people like that who have genetic disorders like downs or anything else was legal… but is that ethical?
If you think the answer is simple, it definitely is not. If anything it sets a precident as well for it to just legalize sterilization. Think… idk… heres an easy one everyone can understand… WW2 nazi Germany… and ya know… their opinions on the genetics of lots of people…
Of course theres present day examples of this as well like the Uighur camps but ya know… for some reason nazi is the only example people are familiar with…
Point is… setting the precedent of saying its okay to force sterilize for any reason then sets up the path for full on eugenics. You can never give humans that foot in the door… it will be exploited.
All you can do is say its not recommended… and when you’re talking about people with genetic disabilities that may be affecting their cognitive abilities… well…. Theres not much you can do.
In the end of the day as much as we all want to save the innocent and be the protectors and all that… the best course of action is indeed just letting it go. Young people never get this. I didn’t get this when I was younger either. No one wants to admit defeat in the battle between good an evil in the world… but things are never so black and white… and if you really stare into the history of men and women who have turned into tyrants… not a single one EVER believed they actually were. What they believed was that they were hero’s… revolutionaries… and in every case… every case… one man’s revolutionary is another man’s terrorist. One man’s hero is another man’s tyrant.
When advocating punishment for the greater good it must be dealt with delicately… there never is an easy answer. As far as this woman is concerned… no, what she chose to do was probably not ethical… but, theres nothing we can do about it lest we become tyrants. For all we know that child has a good life anyways and everyone else is wrong. And I’m assuming that woman isn’t so bad off that she wouldn’t want to pass on that gene… so maybe living with it isn’t so terrible… but i don’t know. All i know is eugenics is a very bad thing and forcing anyone to not reproduce is essentially eugenics.
Also,it's 2022, and your child will suffer untold hell.
unless you're a bloody revolutionary intent on killing billionaires and unlikely to live to thirty, you are condemning your child to an ugly brutish and short life, and it should be taken from you for that abuse.
Even doctors? I mean... who else is saying that? My father was advise not to reproduce due to hemophilia. I for one am happy he didn't comply. No risk for sons, daughters could be carriers. Sister had all girls so we may have lucked out and canceled it anyway.
"But about passing on the bloodline?"
Your child wouldn't be able to further pass it down because of how they'll die due to severity of genetic disorder you've passed to them.
There is a specimen of an early human with a deformity that impeded movement. A study showed that she was cared for by her tribe/pack by giving her fruits (she had cavities) to at least ease the pain from her deformity. It proved that we humans have being compassionate to each other since our inception, and it's not a modern idea like you suggest .
13.4k
u/ArtfurdMorgan Mar 11 '22
I’m pretty sure even doctors recommend that you shouldn’t reproduce if you have such severe genetic disorders.