This makes me feel very sad

[dyza]

Hmmm, no where in the article did it say that abortions are taking place at an increased rate, they said that there was no evidence to say for what reason there was a decline.
You know me, we have two children 12 years apart, first born is a carrier, second has CF. We did not know that our first was a carrier until craig was born with cf. We decided that I should have a vasectomy, I was 39 the wife 38, I guess age is against us for more children so the decision was easy, but there was no way that we would take the chance of having another with cf.
By saying that does not change anything after the fact, we had Craig, we love him, we would not change him for the world.
Incidently we are both against abortion.

Craig

 

[dyza]

Hmmm, no where in the article did it say that abortions are taking place at an increased rate, they said that there was no evidence to say for what reason there was a decline.
You know me, we have two children 12 years apart, first born is a carrier, second has CF. We did not know that our first was a carrier until craig was born with cf. We decided that I should have a vasectomy, I was 39 the wife 38, I guess age is against us for more children so the decision was easy, but there was no way that we would take the chance of having another with cf.
By saying that does not change anything after the fact, we had Craig, we love him, we would not change him for the world.
Incidently we are both against abortion.

Craig

 

[dyza]

Hmmm, no where in the article did it say that abortions are taking place at an increased rate, they said that there was no evidence to say for what reason there was a decline.
You know me, we have two children 12 years apart, first born is a carrier, second has CF. We did not know that our first was a carrier until craig was born with cf. We decided that I should have a vasectomy, I was 39 the wife 38, I guess age is against us for more children so the decision was easy, but there was no way that we would take the chance of having another with cf.
By saying that does not change anything after the fact, we had Craig, we love him, we would not change him for the world.
Incidently we are both against abortion.

Craig

 

[dyza]

Hmmm, no where in the article did it say that abortions are taking place at an increased rate, they said that there was no evidence to say for what reason there was a decline.
You know me, we have two children 12 years apart, first born is a carrier, second has CF. We did not know that our first was a carrier until craig was born with cf. We decided that I should have a vasectomy, I was 39 the wife 38, I guess age is against us for more children so the decision was easy, but there was no way that we would take the chance of having another with cf.
By saying that does not change anything after the fact, we had Craig, we love him, we would not change him for the world.
Incidently we are both against abortion.

Craig

 

[dyza]

Hmmm, no where in the article did it say that abortions are taking place at an increased rate, they said that there was no evidence to say for what reason there was a decline.
<br />You know me, we have two children 12 years apart, first born is a carrier, second has CF. We did not know that our first was a carrier until craig was born with cf. We decided that I should have a vasectomy, I was 39 the wife 38, I guess age is against us for more children so the decision was easy, but there was no way that we would take the chance of having another with cf.
<br />By saying that does not change anything after the fact, we had Craig, we love him, we would not change him for the world.
<br />Incidently we are both against abortion.
<br />
<br />Craig

 

[bittyhorse23]

I think the whole "God" complex depends on your definition of God. I don't want to get into it with anyone about God; I'm just stating that depending on YOUR beliefs will determine what a "God" complex entails to YOU.

I understand the point of view of playing God with genetics before the child is born - being able to choose boy/girl, terminating a pregnancy because of suspected deformities, picking eye color, etc (this is my view of a God complex). However, I don't see a cure as a God complex. If we state that then shouldn't we say ALL forms of medical treatment are God complexes? For instance, medical procedures saving lives, transplants, and medicine in general; wouldn't they fall under that category if we place cures in there too?

For me, once a baby is born, the whole idea of God interfering in creating that life is now gone. Now He focuses on the life itself. What bothers me is when we, as humans, interfere with the CREATION of life and take the surprise and miracle out of it. Yes I also see in-vitro, and all those pregnancy helpers, as a partial complex as well. You are aiding in the creation of life. Though to contradict myself, I can see how if you are choosing to go that route, you would not want un-healthy embryos implanted. To me that isn't as much of an interference as deciding your child's physical features and attributes. Call it hypocrisy, call it ridiculous but it is what I believe. I have NO problems with utilizing in-vitro to help a couple, who can not conceive, have a child. I only have issues with picking and choosing that child's qualities.

I agree with Coltsfan and Wheezie that if I were to get married and my husband tested positive as a carrier, I would not have a natural child with him. I may want a child more than anything but I would not knowingly take the risk of that child having CF. I would put my energy elsewhere and adopt a baby. In addition, if he tested negative and we decided to have a child, and that child still had CF, that was the risk we took when we conceived. I would not terminate my pregnancy if I found out beforehand, and actually, I would not want the baby to be tested until it was born.

Ok I have rambled on long enough and I am sure mad a few people mad so I will end it.

 

[bittyhorse23]

I think the whole "God" complex depends on your definition of God. I don't want to get into it with anyone about God; I'm just stating that depending on YOUR beliefs will determine what a "God" complex entails to YOU.

I understand the point of view of playing God with genetics before the child is born - being able to choose boy/girl, terminating a pregnancy because of suspected deformities, picking eye color, etc (this is my view of a God complex). However, I don't see a cure as a God complex. If we state that then shouldn't we say ALL forms of medical treatment are God complexes? For instance, medical procedures saving lives, transplants, and medicine in general; wouldn't they fall under that category if we place cures in there too?

For me, once a baby is born, the whole idea of God interfering in creating that life is now gone. Now He focuses on the life itself. What bothers me is when we, as humans, interfere with the CREATION of life and take the surprise and miracle out of it. Yes I also see in-vitro, and all those pregnancy helpers, as a partial complex as well. You are aiding in the creation of life. Though to contradict myself, I can see how if you are choosing to go that route, you would not want un-healthy embryos implanted. To me that isn't as much of an interference as deciding your child's physical features and attributes. Call it hypocrisy, call it ridiculous but it is what I believe. I have NO problems with utilizing in-vitro to help a couple, who can not conceive, have a child. I only have issues with picking and choosing that child's qualities.

I agree with Coltsfan and Wheezie that if I were to get married and my husband tested positive as a carrier, I would not have a natural child with him. I may want a child more than anything but I would not knowingly take the risk of that child having CF. I would put my energy elsewhere and adopt a baby. In addition, if he tested negative and we decided to have a child, and that child still had CF, that was the risk we took when we conceived. I would not terminate my pregnancy if I found out beforehand, and actually, I would not want the baby to be tested until it was born.

Ok I have rambled on long enough and I am sure mad a few people mad so I will end it.

 

[bittyhorse23]

I think the whole "God" complex depends on your definition of God. I don't want to get into it with anyone about God; I'm just stating that depending on YOUR beliefs will determine what a "God" complex entails to YOU.

I understand the point of view of playing God with genetics before the child is born - being able to choose boy/girl, terminating a pregnancy because of suspected deformities, picking eye color, etc (this is my view of a God complex). However, I don't see a cure as a God complex. If we state that then shouldn't we say ALL forms of medical treatment are God complexes? For instance, medical procedures saving lives, transplants, and medicine in general; wouldn't they fall under that category if we place cures in there too?

For me, once a baby is born, the whole idea of God interfering in creating that life is now gone. Now He focuses on the life itself. What bothers me is when we, as humans, interfere with the CREATION of life and take the surprise and miracle out of it. Yes I also see in-vitro, and all those pregnancy helpers, as a partial complex as well. You are aiding in the creation of life. Though to contradict myself, I can see how if you are choosing to go that route, you would not want un-healthy embryos implanted. To me that isn't as much of an interference as deciding your child's physical features and attributes. Call it hypocrisy, call it ridiculous but it is what I believe. I have NO problems with utilizing in-vitro to help a couple, who can not conceive, have a child. I only have issues with picking and choosing that child's qualities.

I agree with Coltsfan and Wheezie that if I were to get married and my husband tested positive as a carrier, I would not have a natural child with him. I may want a child more than anything but I would not knowingly take the risk of that child having CF. I would put my energy elsewhere and adopt a baby. In addition, if he tested negative and we decided to have a child, and that child still had CF, that was the risk we took when we conceived. I would not terminate my pregnancy if I found out beforehand, and actually, I would not want the baby to be tested until it was born.

Ok I have rambled on long enough and I am sure mad a few people mad so I will end it.

 

[bittyhorse23]

I think the whole "God" complex depends on your definition of God. I don't want to get into it with anyone about God; I'm just stating that depending on YOUR beliefs will determine what a "God" complex entails to YOU.

I understand the point of view of playing God with genetics before the child is born - being able to choose boy/girl, terminating a pregnancy because of suspected deformities, picking eye color, etc (this is my view of a God complex). However, I don't see a cure as a God complex. If we state that then shouldn't we say ALL forms of medical treatment are God complexes? For instance, medical procedures saving lives, transplants, and medicine in general; wouldn't they fall under that category if we place cures in there too?

For me, once a baby is born, the whole idea of God interfering in creating that life is now gone. Now He focuses on the life itself. What bothers me is when we, as humans, interfere with the CREATION of life and take the surprise and miracle out of it. Yes I also see in-vitro, and all those pregnancy helpers, as a partial complex as well. You are aiding in the creation of life. Though to contradict myself, I can see how if you are choosing to go that route, you would not want un-healthy embryos implanted. To me that isn't as much of an interference as deciding your child's physical features and attributes. Call it hypocrisy, call it ridiculous but it is what I believe. I have NO problems with utilizing in-vitro to help a couple, who can not conceive, have a child. I only have issues with picking and choosing that child's qualities.

I agree with Coltsfan and Wheezie that if I were to get married and my husband tested positive as a carrier, I would not have a natural child with him. I may want a child more than anything but I would not knowingly take the risk of that child having CF. I would put my energy elsewhere and adopt a baby. In addition, if he tested negative and we decided to have a child, and that child still had CF, that was the risk we took when we conceived. I would not terminate my pregnancy if I found out beforehand, and actually, I would not want the baby to be tested until it was born.

Ok I have rambled on long enough and I am sure mad a few people mad so I will end it.

 

[bittyhorse23]

I think the whole "God" complex depends on your definition of God. I don't want to get into it with anyone about God; I'm just stating that depending on YOUR beliefs will determine what a "God" complex entails to YOU.
<br />
<br />I understand the point of view of playing God with genetics before the child is born - being able to choose boy/girl, terminating a pregnancy because of suspected deformities, picking eye color, etc (this is my view of a God complex). However, I don't see a cure as a God complex. If we state that then shouldn't we say ALL forms of medical treatment are God complexes? For instance, medical procedures saving lives, transplants, and medicine in general; wouldn't they fall under that category if we place cures in there too?
<br />
<br />For me, once a baby is born, the whole idea of God interfering in creating that life is now gone. Now He focuses on the life itself. What bothers me is when we, as humans, interfere with the CREATION of life and take the surprise and miracle out of it. Yes I also see in-vitro, and all those pregnancy helpers, as a partial complex as well. You are aiding in the creation of life. Though to contradict myself, I can see how if you are choosing to go that route, you would not want un-healthy embryos implanted. To me that isn't as much of an interference as deciding your child's physical features and attributes. Call it hypocrisy, call it ridiculous but it is what I believe. I have NO problems with utilizing in-vitro to help a couple, who can not conceive, have a child. I only have issues with picking and choosing that child's qualities.
<br />
<br />I agree with Coltsfan and Wheezie that if I were to get married and my husband tested positive as a carrier, I would not have a natural child with him. I may want a child more than anything but I would not knowingly take the risk of that child having CF. I would put my energy elsewhere and adopt a baby. In addition, if he tested negative and we decided to have a child, and that child still had CF, that was the risk we took when we conceived. I would not terminate my pregnancy if I found out beforehand, and actually, I would not want the baby to be tested until it was born.
<br />
<br />Ok I have rambled on long enough and I am sure mad a few people mad so I will end it.

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>idajune</b></i>
But we all know how great we are, if only people weren't so afraid and better informed. Giving life through birth is a choice (in most cases) choosing how 'perfect' that life should be is not ours, and yet we make it so.</end quote></div>


This is purely a matter of perspective. Who "decides" how perfect a life should be? Not everybody adheres to the identical belief system here. Is it fair that a parent condemn their would be child to numerous years of physical torment due to their religious taboo? I would say no, but again that is a matter of perspective.
Now at the time of my birth, my parents did not yet know of me having CF. I was extremely sick- the doctors could not figure out why. Eventually I was diagnosed with CF. Now if tests would be available to detect with absolute certainty that the baby in my mother's womb (me) would be inflicted with CF, would I want to terminate myself? Now that is also a hotly contested issue, but seeing is all the pain and anguish, not to mention embarrassment and suffering I went through, absolutely. I have no doubts about it. Now in 2008, we have many more tools available to help fight CF and we can live a somewhat "normal" life, but in 1979, we were charity cases with one foot in the grave already. So in today's day and age, I would lean towards "no", but I would let the decision rest with the would be parents.
Now someone commented about "playing God". I'm only commenting on this because it scares me. If everyone had this mentality, we'd all still be living in caves and riding around in horse-drawn carriages. I hear this bumper sticker slogan a lot about stem-cell research, and it's totally ridiculous. Stem cell research has the potential to offer scientific breakthroughs for practically every ill humans suffer, as stem cells can transform to any living cell in the human body. Now with that being said, I say the people in Congress who vote against stem cell research, should sign a waiver that does not let them, or their immediate family ever benefit from it. It's only fitting, they benefit from science everyday without knowing it.

Just my dos centavos.<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif" border="0">

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>idajune</b></i>
But we all know how great we are, if only people weren't so afraid and better informed. Giving life through birth is a choice (in most cases) choosing how 'perfect' that life should be is not ours, and yet we make it so.</end quote></div>


This is purely a matter of perspective. Who "decides" how perfect a life should be? Not everybody adheres to the identical belief system here. Is it fair that a parent condemn their would be child to numerous years of physical torment due to their religious taboo? I would say no, but again that is a matter of perspective.
Now at the time of my birth, my parents did not yet know of me having CF. I was extremely sick- the doctors could not figure out why. Eventually I was diagnosed with CF. Now if tests would be available to detect with absolute certainty that the baby in my mother's womb (me) would be inflicted with CF, would I want to terminate myself? Now that is also a hotly contested issue, but seeing is all the pain and anguish, not to mention embarrassment and suffering I went through, absolutely. I have no doubts about it. Now in 2008, we have many more tools available to help fight CF and we can live a somewhat "normal" life, but in 1979, we were charity cases with one foot in the grave already. So in today's day and age, I would lean towards "no", but I would let the decision rest with the would be parents.
Now someone commented about "playing God". I'm only commenting on this because it scares me. If everyone had this mentality, we'd all still be living in caves and riding around in horse-drawn carriages. I hear this bumper sticker slogan a lot about stem-cell research, and it's totally ridiculous. Stem cell research has the potential to offer scientific breakthroughs for practically every ill humans suffer, as stem cells can transform to any living cell in the human body. Now with that being said, I say the people in Congress who vote against stem cell research, should sign a waiver that does not let them, or their immediate family ever benefit from it. It's only fitting, they benefit from science everyday without knowing it.

Just my dos centavos.<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif" border="0">

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>idajune</b></i>
But we all know how great we are, if only people weren't so afraid and better informed. Giving life through birth is a choice (in most cases) choosing how 'perfect' that life should be is not ours, and yet we make it so.</end quote></div>


This is purely a matter of perspective. Who "decides" how perfect a life should be? Not everybody adheres to the identical belief system here. Is it fair that a parent condemn their would be child to numerous years of physical torment due to their religious taboo? I would say no, but again that is a matter of perspective.
Now at the time of my birth, my parents did not yet know of me having CF. I was extremely sick- the doctors could not figure out why. Eventually I was diagnosed with CF. Now if tests would be available to detect with absolute certainty that the baby in my mother's womb (me) would be inflicted with CF, would I want to terminate myself? Now that is also a hotly contested issue, but seeing is all the pain and anguish, not to mention embarrassment and suffering I went through, absolutely. I have no doubts about it. Now in 2008, we have many more tools available to help fight CF and we can live a somewhat "normal" life, but in 1979, we were charity cases with one foot in the grave already. So in today's day and age, I would lean towards "no", but I would let the decision rest with the would be parents.
Now someone commented about "playing God". I'm only commenting on this because it scares me. If everyone had this mentality, we'd all still be living in caves and riding around in horse-drawn carriages. I hear this bumper sticker slogan a lot about stem-cell research, and it's totally ridiculous. Stem cell research has the potential to offer scientific breakthroughs for practically every ill humans suffer, as stem cells can transform to any living cell in the human body. Now with that being said, I say the people in Congress who vote against stem cell research, should sign a waiver that does not let them, or their immediate family ever benefit from it. It's only fitting, they benefit from science everyday without knowing it.

Just my dos centavos.<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif" border="0">

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>idajune</b></i>
But we all know how great we are, if only people weren't so afraid and better informed. Giving life through birth is a choice (in most cases) choosing how 'perfect' that life should be is not ours, and yet we make it so.</end quote>


This is purely a matter of perspective. Who "decides" how perfect a life should be? Not everybody adheres to the identical belief system here. Is it fair that a parent condemn their would be child to numerous years of physical torment due to their religious taboo? I would say no, but again that is a matter of perspective.
Now at the time of my birth, my parents did not yet know of me having CF. I was extremely sick- the doctors could not figure out why. Eventually I was diagnosed with CF. Now if tests would be available to detect with absolute certainty that the baby in my mother's womb (me) would be inflicted with CF, would I want to terminate myself? Now that is also a hotly contested issue, but seeing is all the pain and anguish, not to mention embarrassment and suffering I went through, absolutely. I have no doubts about it. Now in 2008, we have many more tools available to help fight CF and we can live a somewhat "normal" life, but in 1979, we were charity cases with one foot in the grave already. So in today's day and age, I would lean towards "no", but I would let the decision rest with the would be parents.
Now someone commented about "playing God". I'm only commenting on this because it scares me. If everyone had this mentality, we'd all still be living in caves and riding around in horse-drawn carriages. I hear this bumper sticker slogan a lot about stem-cell research, and it's totally ridiculous. Stem cell research has the potential to offer scientific breakthroughs for practically every ill humans suffer, as stem cells can transform to any living cell in the human body. Now with that being said, I say the people in Congress who vote against stem cell research, should sign a waiver that does not let them, or their immediate family ever benefit from it. It's only fitting, they benefit from science everyday without knowing it.

Just my dos centavos.<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif" border="0">

 

[Solo]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>idajune</b></i>
<br />But we all know how great we are, if only people weren't so afraid and better informed. Giving life through birth is a choice (in most cases) choosing how 'perfect' that life should be is not ours, and yet we make it so.</end quote>
<br />
<br />
<br />This is purely a matter of perspective. Who "decides" how perfect a life should be? Not everybody adheres to the identical belief system here. Is it fair that a parent condemn their would be child to numerous years of physical torment due to their religious taboo? I would say no, but again that is a matter of perspective.
<br />Now at the time of my birth, my parents did not yet know of me having CF. I was extremely sick- the doctors could not figure out why. Eventually I was diagnosed with CF. Now if tests would be available to detect with absolute certainty that the baby in my mother's womb (me) would be inflicted with CF, would I want to terminate myself? Now that is also a hotly contested issue, but seeing is all the pain and anguish, not to mention embarrassment and suffering I went through, absolutely. I have no doubts about it. Now in 2008, we have many more tools available to help fight CF and we can live a somewhat "normal" life, but in 1979, we were charity cases with one foot in the grave already. So in today's day and age, I would lean towards "no", but I would let the decision rest with the would be parents.
<br />Now someone commented about "playing God". I'm only commenting on this because it scares me. If everyone had this mentality, we'd all still be living in caves and riding around in horse-drawn carriages. I hear this bumper sticker slogan a lot about stem-cell research, and it's totally ridiculous. Stem cell research has the potential to offer scientific breakthroughs for practically every ill humans suffer, as stem cells can transform to any living cell in the human body. Now with that being said, I say the people in Congress who vote against stem cell research, should sign a waiver that does not let them, or their immediate family ever benefit from it. It's only fitting, they benefit from science everyday without knowing it.
<br />
<br />Just my dos centavos.<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif" border="0">
<br />
<br />
<br />

 

[Uli]

My personal opinion has always been, that I would not want a child, when I know I´m having a disease which can be given on to the child.

I have lived my life "to the fullest", I have been lucky to be able to do so, because my cf was "light". But now I´m on IV since 1,5 years, I´m coughing all the time, can´t sleep because of that and every muscle hurts. Others with cf do have much severer problems much earlier in their life, and nobody really knows how the life with cf will be for their child and how severe the disease will be.

So if I would not have been born, I would have "missed" both lucky and bad moments, but as I would not have existed at all in fact I would have missed nothing...


Uli,45, Germany

 

[Uli]

My personal opinion has always been, that I would not want a child, when I know I´m having a disease which can be given on to the child.

I have lived my life "to the fullest", I have been lucky to be able to do so, because my cf was "light". But now I´m on IV since 1,5 years, I´m coughing all the time, can´t sleep because of that and every muscle hurts. Others with cf do have much severer problems much earlier in their life, and nobody really knows how the life with cf will be for their child and how severe the disease will be.

So if I would not have been born, I would have "missed" both lucky and bad moments, but as I would not have existed at all in fact I would have missed nothing...


Uli,45, Germany

 

[Uli]

My personal opinion has always been, that I would not want a child, when I know I´m having a disease which can be given on to the child.

I have lived my life "to the fullest", I have been lucky to be able to do so, because my cf was "light". But now I´m on IV since 1,5 years, I´m coughing all the time, can´t sleep because of that and every muscle hurts. Others with cf do have much severer problems much earlier in their life, and nobody really knows how the life with cf will be for their child and how severe the disease will be.

So if I would not have been born, I would have "missed" both lucky and bad moments, but as I would not have existed at all in fact I would have missed nothing...


Uli,45, Germany

 

[Uli]

My personal opinion has always been, that I would not want a child, when I know I´m having a disease which can be given on to the child.

I have lived my life "to the fullest", I have been lucky to be able to do so, because my cf was "light". But now I´m on IV since 1,5 years, I´m coughing all the time, can´t sleep because of that and every muscle hurts. Others with cf do have much severer problems much earlier in their life, and nobody really knows how the life with cf will be for their child and how severe the disease will be.

So if I would not have been born, I would have "missed" both lucky and bad moments, but as I would not have existed at all in fact I would have missed nothing...


Uli,45, Germany

 

[Uli]

My personal opinion has always been, that I would not want a child, when I know I´m having a disease which can be given on to the child.
<br />
<br />I have lived my life "to the fullest", I have been lucky to be able to do so, because my cf was "light". But now I´m on IV since 1,5 years, I´m coughing all the time, can´t sleep because of that and every muscle hurts. Others with cf do have much severer problems much earlier in their life, and nobody really knows how the life with cf will be for their child and how severe the disease will be.
<br />
<br />So if I would not have been born, I would have "missed" both lucky and bad moments, but as I would not have existed at all in fact I would have missed nothing...
<br />
<br />
<br />Uli,45, Germany