Statistics are very cold things. Especially when they belie the intensely personal and painful stories of individuals. So it is in the case of late term abortion. Like many pro-choice advocates, I am uncomfortable in theory with the idea of late term abortion. I use the ‘in theory’ qualifier because medical reasons are (in my opinion) altogether different to other reasons.
Today, a very personal story from one man whose family had to make an impossible choice……
Chris Howe writes……
“Can you see the monitor?” the nurse asks. “No,” I lie. The nurse nods and ceases adjusting the display.I hold my wife’s hand, stealing glimpses at the monitor. The procedure is very simple. A quick injection into the thigh to sedate. It is important there is no movement during the procedure. I, punishing myself, secretly watch the display.
On the monitor I see a needle carefully pierce the heart wall, injecting a solution. There is no delay. The heart stops immediately. My wife cries. I join her. Inside, our daughter, a week away from being born, shifts slightly. She is unaware of the death of her brother moments before and centimetres away. At 34 weeks, it’s a late termination.
I’m not a great man. I may not even be a good man. I know in some eyes, I’m as evil as it gets. This story isn’t fun or easy to tell. It was hard to live, and it still haunts me.
It rolled from a single ‘indicator’ at 24 weeks to genetic tests uncovering a deletion at 32 weeks. “How bad is that?” I asked the geneticist. “It’s never good,” he responded. It was 23 December, 2008.
For the next few hours we discussed his condition. He’d look normal. He’d live almost as long as his sister, with a small chance of an early death from a heart condition. He wouldn’t walk before six years of age, and he’d never talk. He’d be unable to express himself or to tell the difference between loved ones and strangers. Kisses could become vicious bites due to low impulse control. He’d be violent and would need to be kept away from children his own age. Inappropriate approaches to strangers during puberty were likely.
He’d never live an independent life. He’d require care from birth to death.
Sometimes, the decision to abort is almost made for us. The defect means the child won’t survive, or the mother’s life is at risk, or both. Without diminishing the horror for the parents, it can simply be tragically unavoidable. But not in the case of Fred. We had to ask the hard questions. Questions that make you seem like a villain for even considering them.
What makes us human? When is a life worth living? Worth ending? How much suffering is bearable? Is avoiding suffering brave or is it cowardice? When is abortion justified?
Should Fred be born, my wife would never return to work. My daughters would always come second. Research showed a high chance of divorce before my son was a teenager, the stress of care literally tearing our family apart. Every news article we read showed little or no government support, with charities closing their doors. The doctors were encouraging about support; the real life carers we spoke to, not so much.
I’d never support killing a born child on any grounds. Yet here I was, suggesting death for a child almost born. I may not be a good man, but I’m a husband and a father. Had we not known, I’d be living with Fred’s condition today; but we take the tests so we can act on the information received.
So, let a bad man say the words that will condemn me: Fred’s life would have been less than human. It would have been filled with love, yes, but mostly loneliness, confusion, pain and frustration. The risk to my marriage and the welfare of my daughters was too much. I chose to minimise suffering. For my wife, for my daughters, for myself and most of all for Fred, I chose abortion. It was a choice of love.
You can read the full article here
And if you are reading this and you are in need of support please also visit any or all of these amazing resources
Image by Shutterstock
Top Comments
As much as I love the supportive nature of the MamaMia community, I have a sincere question for the author that could be construed as less than supportive, and I apologize in advance.
My question is, if that twin's diagnosis were for a disability of potentially lesser severity, say Down syndrome for example, would you have made the same choice, and if not, where would that line be drawn - at what point do we cease to value the lives of people with disabilities and put our lifestyles ahead of our unborn children?
I struggle with these questions, and while I know they may be very difficult to answer, I think it's an important discussion. I have a son with Down syndrome, undiagnosed until birth. I chose not to be tested prenatally, because I didn't want to have to make a choice (and if I'm really honest, I was somewhat blase, assuming "bad" things happen to other people). I honestly do not know if I would have terminated him or not. I like to think not, and knowing what (and who) I know now, it wouldn't happen, but that's with hindsight and an amazing son who has not destroyed me or my family.
Where do we, as a society draw the line? In India, infant girls are frequently killed at birth, in Australia, disabled infants are sometimes killed just before birth. Why is one wrong and not the other.
I'm probably not expressing this well, and I feel for Chris for losing a son, but should these sorts of terminations be part of a (relatively) developed society?
HI Sam,
Sorry for the late reply, I only check back in on this post once in a blue moon.
Let me start by saying that killing a child because she was born a girl is immoral, and not at all like a late termination following a genetic diagnosis. I hope you can tell the difference there. One is not like the other.
Personally, I don't see a great moral superiority in bring severely disabled children into the world. I'd like to think (and you may disagree that I have accomplished this) that I've reduced the total amount of suffering by making the choice I made. Why burden someone with suffering just because? It makes no sense to me.
What would have made me make a different choice? I see no point in answering endless what-if scenarios, but I can say one thing - the NDS is a step in the right direction. True government support, for those that need it would have been great to have.
Besides, the twins I have had since 2008 would never have existed had Fred been born. Is there existence gained under false pretence? Do they not deserve their life? If I'm playing what-if scenarios, you've got to answer that too.
None of us know the future, which is why the what-if's are pointless. We make choices based on the best available information. I'd rather that choice be allowed that not.
Chris, your story is painfully true for me. My wife decided against an abortion at 12 weeks even though we had a clear diagnosis of our child's outcome. Her basis was because she is a roman catholic. Pretty much everything the doctors said of our child's future has come true and we are living the nightmare scenario in your what if Fred was born. Now not all the events that you mentioned haven't happened, yet, but as our son get's older it's clear what will happen to our family as our child struggles everyday to do the moist basic things. The physical pain our child endures, which isn't horrible, certainly much worse than a normal child , and the fact that her future looks very bleak is the hardest part. It's amazing that an intelligent woman, my wife, would make a decision against what the doctors recommended, against what basic common sense would say, and most importantly against the best interests if her family. To follow the beliefs of a bunch of senile old men with a penchant for power amazes every time I look at my child as he struggles to sit up.
So sorry to read this story. I understand. I pass no judgement, nor do I have a right to as I have not been in your position myself.