Foetal alcohol syndrome

[purves grundy]

Stuff like this

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...ancy-mother-forced-pay-child-damages-drinking

gets me goat.

I can't understand that, if "learning difficulties and an inability to connect emotionally with their peers" is one of the factors used to identify this 'disease', why aren't we inundating the state with claims based on the similar / worse symptoms thanks to poverty and the like?

And where's the focus on the alcohol consumption of partners, which surely has a clearer link to bad times for a child than a mum having a few? And getting paranoid about how much is too much, being seen as irresponsible etc so ending up having nothing, based on what are probably shakey and poorly reported medical opinions.

 

[Thora]

A very frightening attack on women and women's bodily autonomy. I really hope we aren't going the way of America.

 

[pogofish]

I can't understand that, if "learning difficulties and an inability to connect emotionally with their peers" is one of the factors used to identify this 'disease', why aren't we inundating the state with claims based on the similar / worse symptoms thanks to poverty and the like?

Poverty does not have a head of wealthy medical-interest think-tanks behind it - And now the likes of the globally active RWJF, with their methods of "policy trumps everything" and medicated abstinence, have got behind the subject, I doubt its going to get any better:

http://www.rwjf.org/en/research-pub...s-legal-issues-for-people-with-fetal-alc.html

 

[bluescreen]

As if "learning difficulties and an inability to connect emotionally with their peers" aren't due to a common cause with the mother's alcoholism, anyway, rather than caused by it.

 

[8115]

Severe FAS is a quite serious condition.

I am in two minds. I don't think the law is good at causing people to change their behaviour in this kind of scenario. But it is grossly irresponsible to drink very heavily while knowingly pregnant. I don't think it is anti-feminist to say that.

 

[8115]

Seems like this is all about the money for the care though.

 

[Thora]

Severe FAS is a quite serious condition.

I am in two minds. I don't think the law is good at causing people to change their behaviour in this kind of scenario. But it is grossly irresponsible to drink very heavily while knowingly pregnant. I don't think it is anti-feminist to say that.

It might not be anti-feminist to thinking heavy drinking is irresponsible - but this case goes further and wants to hold women responsible for an offence against a person if a foetus is damaged.

 

[bluescreen]

It might not be anti-feminist to thinking heavy drinking is irresponsible - but this case goes further and wants to hold women responsible for an offence against a person if a foetus is damaged.

This case goes further and asserts that a foetus is a person.

 

[8115]

It might not be anti-feminist to thinking heavy drinking is irresponsible - but this case goes further and wants to hold women responsible for an offence against a person if a foetus is damaged.

Kind of. They say something like "it could leave it open". Damage done at 3 months can be just as severe if not more than damage done later I think.

Like I said I don't think the law is good here.

 

[Thora]

Kind of. They say something like "it could leave it open". Damage done at 3 months can be just as severe if not more than damage done later I think.

Like I said I don't think the law is good here.

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

 

[8115]

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

I think the personhood debate is important in abortion, not really so important here.

 

[8115]

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

Also the case is not against the women. It is to say that a crime was commited so children can claim compensation. Presumably usually from government not from mothers.

 

[Thora]

I think the personhood debate is important in abortion, not really so important here.

Why wouldn't it be important here? How could we have abortion if a foetus is legally a person?

It doesn't matter who the case is against, if it concludes that a crime was committed against a person that will have a massive impact on women's rights.

 

[8115]

Why wouldn't it be important here? How could we have abortion if a foetus is legally a person?

It doesn't matter who the case is against, if it concludes that a crime was committed against a person that will have a massive impact on women's rights.

A future person?

Right to do what? Drink incedibly heavily when pregnant? I am not talking about this being thin end of the wedge but this idea on this subject?

 

[Thora]

Yes of course drink heavily when pregnant! Or when possibly pregnant. And smoke, take medication, climb mountains or do anything else then any other person is legally able to do.

 

[bluescreen]

Eh? Not getting what you mean, 8115. I could understand it if you were saying something like: a woman who drinks uncontrollably in pregnancy isn't a safe person to bring up her child, but you don't seem to be saying that.

 

[bluescreen]

Understand, but not necessarily agree with, I mean...

 

[8115]

Thats

Eh? Not getting what you mean, 8115. I could understand it if you were saying something like: a woman who drinks uncontrollably in pregnancy isn't a safe person to bring up her child, but you don't seem to be saying that.

That's definitely not what I was saying. I was saying leaving the law aside that it's wrong to drink heavily when you are pregnant, like it's wrong to drink drive knowing what is known about the possible effects.

 

[Thora]

It's one thing to have a personal opinion on how women should behave - it's when it becomes law that women's rights are threatened.

 

[bluescreen]

Thats
That's definitely not what I was saying. I was saying leaving the law aside that it's wrong to drink heavily when you are pregnant, like it's wrong to drink drive knowing what is known about the possible effects.

Wrong = immoral, wrong = illegal, wrong = ill-advised? I'd agree with the first and third of these.

 

[Sasaferrato]

A very frightening attack on women and women's bodily autonomy. I really hope we aren't going the way of America.

'The British Pregnancy Advisory Service and legal charity Birthrights have applied to address the court on the case. They believe the ruling could undermine women's freedom to make decisions for themselves while pregnant.'

You don't have the right to damage another human being. End of.

The dangers of excess alcohol in pregnancy isn't something new, it is something that has been known about for a long time. Ditto smoking in pregnancy.

May I make the probably deeply unpopular observation, that if you cannot bring yourself to stop smoking and drinking to excess whilst pregnant, you should really have a long hard look at yourself, and asses your suitability to be a mother?

 

[Sasaferrato]

Why wouldn't it be important here? How could we have abortion if a foetus is legally a person?

It doesn't matter who the case is against, if it concludes that a crime was committed against a person that will have a massive impact on women's rights.

Good question. It is perhaps time to define a foetus as a person.

 

[Thora]

'The British Pregnancy Advisory Service and legal charity Birthrights have applied to address the court on the case. They believe the ruling could undermine women's freedom to make decisions for themselves while pregnant.'

You don't have the right to damage another human being. End of.

The dangers of excess alcohol in pregnancy isn't something new, it is something that has been known about for a long time. Ditto smoking in pregnancy.

May I make the probably deeply unpopular observation, that if you cannot bring yourself to stop smoking and drinking to excess whilst pregnant, you should really have a long hard look at yourself, and asses your suitability to be a mother?

So, you'd be ok with smoking and drinking in pregnancy so long as the foetus is aborted?

 

[Thora]

Good question. It is perhaps time to define a foetus as a person.

There's little point arguing with you on this, as we have completely different views on the rights and status of women.

 

[equationgirl]

'The British Pregnancy Advisory Service and legal charity Birthrights have applied to address the court on the case. They believe the ruling could undermine women's freedom to make decisions for themselves while pregnant.'

You don't have the right to damage another human being. End of.

The dangers of excess alcohol in pregnancy isn't something new, it is something that has been known about for a long time. Ditto smoking in pregnancy.

May I make the probably deeply unpopular observation, that if you cannot bring yourself to stop smoking and drinking to excess whilst pregnant, you should really have a long hard look at yourself, and asses your suitability to be a mother?

Nobody has the right to damage another human being, male or female.

 

[bluescreen]

A foetus isn't a human being. It is a potential human being. I can't believe we are having this debate here in the UK in 2014.

 

[equationgirl]

Do you think it's okay for a man to smoke around his pregnant partner Sass? The dangers of passive smoking have also been known for a long time.

 

[Sasaferrato]

So, you'd be ok with smoking and drinking in pregnancy so long as the foetus is aborted?

I think my view on abortion is fairly well known. I would rather it didn't happen.

No, I don't feel that I have the right to impose this view on others, and I do support the right of any woman to choose to have an abortion if she wishes.

Ironic though, in one part of a hospital, a foetus is being aborted, whilst elsewhere doctors and nurses are fighting to save the life of a child of the same 'age'.

 

[Sasaferrato]

What about those women who become pregnant by no fault of their own, i.e rape, who live in countries where abortion is not legal(ROI)? Should they give up their own freedoms, e.g smoking, drinking, because another human being decided to damage them?

fh
Nothing is ever absolutely straight forward in life, is it? There are always situations outside the the norm. I would point out though, that whatever the circumstances of conception, the foetus carries no blame.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Innit, in the words of Jeremy kyle "some people shouldn't be allowed to have children"

Or perhaps, people should respect the health and well-being of the child they are carrying?

I can fully understand the 'a foetus is not a person' argument. Killing a person is a much more uncomfortable prospect, than killing a foetus.