Curiously hidden in the online version of her column so that one might easily miss it, Rachel Johnson
Richard Dawkins has caused uproar again,
this time by suggesting that women who find they are pregnant with Down’s
syndrome babies should abort them and start again, as if he is some
innocent-murdering latter-day Herod.
But most women these days are offered tests for Down’s.
Dawkins has apologised, but why do women have such tests if not to be in a position either to choose or reject exactly the course of action that he suggests?
The risk of a miscarriage brought on by the test is in fact higher than the chance of having a baby with Down's Syndrome.
But most women these days are offered tests for Down’s.
Dawkins has apologised, but why do women have such tests if not to be in a position either to choose or reject exactly the course of action that he suggests?
The risk of a miscarriage brought on by the test is in fact higher than the chance of having a baby with Down's Syndrome.
That final fact needs to be much wider known.
ReplyDeleteThe test is not entirely reliable. Obviously, it makes no sense to take the test unless you intend to act upon it. But suppose you took it and it came up positive and you did not choose an abortion. You would have months of anxiety and unhappiness for no gain and it might be wrong anyway.
ReplyDelete