Denmark Wants Total Elimination of People With Down Syndrome, Aborts 98% of Babies

[ABX]

Denmark is on its way to matching Iceland’s 100-percent abortion rate for unborn babies diagnosed with Down syndrome.

In 2014, the Danish government reported 98 percent of unborn babies who tested positive for Down syndrome were aborted.

And cultural attitudes toward children with disabilities are not getting any better in western culture.  As The Federalist’s Georgi Boorman pointed out, Denmark is working to become “Down syndrome free” within the next decade.....

http://www.lifenews.com/2017/03/28/denmark-wants-total-elimination-of-people-with-down-syndrome-aborts-98-of-babies/

[Idaho_Cowboy]

I'm sure the guy with the short mustache we can't talk about would approve.

[musiclady]

We're not far behind here in America.

This is one of the greatest crimes against humanity ever perpetrated on the innocent.

There need to be trials and hangings, IMO, to punish the killers.

[Frank Cannon]

We're not far behind here in America.

Really? Despite the Left pimping them, abortions are going down year over year.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/17/509734620/u-s-abortion-rate-falls-to-lowest-level-since-roe-v-wade

Beyond that, the US has a fairly decent track record of acceptance of people with special needs. From govt' programs, laws and private organizations like the Special Olympics.

[musiclady]

Really? Despite the Left pimping them, abortions are going down year over year.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/17/509734620/u-s-abortion-rate-falls-to-lowest-level-since-roe-v-wade

Beyond that, the US has a fairly decent track record of acceptance of people with special needs. From govt' programs, laws and private organizations like the Special Olympics.

In the US, between 85 and 90% of babies determined to have Downs' Syndrome before birth are aborted.

Even if abortions are "going down" (mostly because of ultra sounds and a very pro-life young generation), the PERCENTAGE of Downs' babies killed in America remains criminally high.

In my view 90% is not far behind Denmark's 98%.

If Planned Parenthood had its way, it would be 100%.

We're not far behind.

One source of many......

http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/down-syndrome-and-abortion-1254

[musiclady]

Here's another, citing 90%.......

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/04/did-you-know-90-of-babies-with-down-syndrome-are-aborted/

And there are others.

[Frank Cannon]

Here's another, citing 90%.......

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/04/04/did-you-know-90-of-babies-with-down-syndrome-are-aborted/

And there are others.

That there is some bullshit spin. That is why the article you posted doesn't cite the original article Rick Santorum lied about on the stump in '12. Here is the study Rick used to make up that 90% full out lie.....

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajmg.a.37001/full

Here is the study broken down into plain English....

www.christianitytoday.com/amyjuliabecker/2015/april/true-or-false-90-of-babies-with-down-syndrome-are-aborted.htmlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajmg.a.37001/full

Second, however, this study also demonstrates that the majority of women carry babies with Down syndrome to term. Here’s where it gets a little confusing. A screening test (and this is true even of the new NIPT tests) simply provides a prediction about whether or not a child will have Down syndrome. The only way to determine a diagnosis with near certainty is through chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis, both of which remain invasive procedures with some measure of risk to the baby. Amniocentesis is the most reliable diagnostic tool, and it cannot be performed until around 16 weeks.

Here’s where the confusing and oft misreported statistics come in. Studies have shown that women who receive a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome through amniocentesis (who make up two percent of the population of pregnant women) generally seek an abortion 90 percent of the time. Still, the majority of women do not seek diagnostic information about their baby’s chromosomal makeup, and the majority of women do not abort their babies with Down syndrome. It’s possible that they don’t abort simply because they don’t know they are carrying a child with Down syndrome. But it is just as likely that they decide against having that information not out of ignorance but out of a commitment to their baby.

Basically only about 30% abort after a Downs diagnosis.

[thackney]

...it is just as likely that they decide against having that information not out of ignorance but out of a commitment to their baby....

That was our case.  We knew if we found out we had a Down's Syndrome child, we would not make changes.  It made no sense then to have the test.

[musiclady]

That there is some bullshit spin. That is why the article you posted doesn't cite the original article Rick Santorum lied about on the stump in '12. Here is the study Rick used to make up that 90% full out lie.....

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajmg.a.37001/full

Here is the study broken down into plain English....

www.christianitytoday.com/amyjuliabecker/2015/april/true-or-false-90-of-babies-with-down-syndrome-are-aborted.htmlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajmg.a.37001/full

Basically only about 30% abort after a Downs diagnosis.

First, I'd like to thank you, @Frank Cannon , for correcting the information I thought was accurate.  It's been 'out there' for a number of years and from a number of sources, so I thought it was true.  As much as I hate being wrong, I'm actually glad to be wrong about this.

Second, this has nothing whatsoever to do with Rick Santorum, nor lying.  It has to do with an honest conveying of inaccurate information which I will not be doing in the future.

Have a good evening, Frank.

[Frank Cannon]

First, I'd like to thank you, @Frank Cannon , for correcting the information I thought was accurate.  It's been 'out there' for a number of years and from a number of sources, so I thought it was true.  As much as I hate being wrong, I'm actually glad to be wrong about this.

Second, this has nothing whatsoever to do with Rick Santorum, nor lying.  It has to do with an honest conveying of inaccurate information which I will not be doing in the future.

Have a good evening, Frank.

My injection of Santorum is because he is the one that popularized the 90% number when he was running. I was so appalled by it that I looked into it. When I found out the truth I was outraged because I thought he was a straight shooter and here he is outright lying about a serious situation just to gin up religious voters.

[musiclady]

My injection of Santorum is because he is the one that popularized the 90% number when he was running. I was so appalled by it that I looked into it. When I found out the truth I was outraged because I thought he was a straight shooter and here he is outright lying about a serious situation just to gin up religious voters.

Unless he was also misinformed?  Unless he was careless and didn't check his sources, as I was by believing the number I had heard repeatedly?  Much more serious to the public than my error (or the sources I cited) because he made the statements publicly, but perhaps he actually believed the number, as do many serious pro-life voters.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Unless he was also misinformed?  Unless he was careless and didn't check his sources, as I was by believing the number I had heard repeatedly?  Much more serious to the public than my error (or the sources I cited) because he made the statements publicly, but perhaps he actually believed the number, as do many serious pro-life voters.

I'm overjoyed to learn the truth. I'd heard the number too and knowing when you follow pro-life news you get so much negative news it just never raised any red flags. Conservative news sources often don't do a much better job of double checking facts that fit their agenda than their liberal cohorts. It's not even a matter of objectivity or fairness as it is factual accurateness. Some do, but I'm learning to double check everything.   

[Frank Cannon]

Unless he was also misinformed?  Unless he was careless and didn't check his sources, as I was by believing the number I had heard repeatedly?  Much more serious to the public than my error (or the sources I cited) because he made the statements publicly, but perhaps he actually believed the number, as do many serious pro-life voters.

Listen. I voted for Rick and gave his campaign enough money to get one of those Santorum vests. It's still in my closet. I do blame him for getting this started though because no one had heard about this prior to him bringing it up. I know that because when I Googled it when he made the assertion, the report was the first thing that popped up. Google it now. It is article after article on the 90% number being true.

It's a serious subject that is controversial. Spinning numbers to make a larger case is irresponsible when it was totally unnecessary. The Pro-Life movement is winning the long game despite their zeal.

[musiclady]

I'm overjoyed to learn the truth. I'd heard the number too and knowing when you follow pro-life news you get so much negative news it just never raised any red flags. Conservative news sources often don't do a much better job of double checking facts that fit their agenda than their liberal cohorts. It's not even a matter of objectivity or fairness as it is factual accurateness. Some do, but I'm learning to double check everything.

I certainly will now.

As you said, if you are receiving multiple pro-life e-mails and contribute to multiple pro-life organizations and hear the same figure from everywhere you believe it to be true.

While it was a horrifying figure, it was not at all surprising because of the goals of PP, in keeping with Margaret Sanger, to eliminate 'faulty' human beings from society.

For me, the goal was driven in when I became pregnant in my late thirties with our fourth child and chose to get an amniocentesis and received PP literature bragging about how they were 'eliminating' birth defects, and gee, wouldn't it be swell if we took care of your Downs baby for you....

We told them that we wouldn't kill our child, no matter what was wrong with her, and as it turned out she was/is perfect - brilliant, athletic, musical, aggressive, and just plain adorable.   ^-^

[musiclady]

Listen. I voted for Rick and gave his campaign enough money to get one of those Santorum vests. It's still in my closet. I do blame him for getting this started though because no one had heard about this prior to him bringing it up. I know that because when I Googled it when he made the assertion, the report was the first thing that popped up. Google it now. It is article after article on the 90% number being true.

It's a serious subject that is controversial. Spinning numbers to make a larger case is irresponsible when it was totally unnecessary. The Pro-Life movement is winning the long game despite their zeal.

I guess I'd have to find out who gave him the number (which is accurate about PP, but incorrect because it's incomplete about abortions as a whole) before I lay the blame solely on him.  Though, he IS responsible to verify the accuracy of the numbers he uses.

I do appreciate your giving me the information about the wrong numbers, though, Frank.  It's very important to be completely accurate when you're debating the issue, and using extreme figures that aren't truthful only hurts the cause.

[SZonian]

That was our case.  We knew if we found out we had a Down's Syndrome child, we would not make changes.  It made no sense then to have the test.

Ditto...

[Suppressed]

My injection of Santorum is because he is the one that popularized the 90% number when he was running. I was so appalled by it that I looked into it. When I found out the truth I was outraged because I thought he was a straight shooter and here he is outright lying about a serious situation just to gin up religious voters.

Thank you, @Frank Cannon and @musiclady for this clean, articulate discussion that raised awareness!