Sarah Palin: Why A Fifth Child at 44?

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

I hesitate to raise questions about a woman's reproductive choices, and I do find it laudable that Sarah Palin chose to raise a Downs syndrome child when so many women these days abort fetuses diagnosed with Downs. However, why would a woman at age 44 take the risk of getting pregnant with a fifth child knowing (as she should) that one of the risks of such a pregnancy is Downs syndrome?

Here is an article pointing to the dramatic increase in risk of Downs syndrome as the mother's age increases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_syndrome#Incidence

I can't imagine that a responsible physician would have encouraged her to seek to get pregnant at that age when she already has four children.

Is Palin one of those extreme right-wingers who believes that all birth control is wrong? I was shocked to discover that there is a faction within the Christian Right that opposes all birth control--is that where she is coming from? Some of the more extreme policy-makers appointed by the Bush Administration opposed all birth-control. Is this what we can expect in a McCain-Palin administration--more of the same?

Steven Webster

[Alecto]

Um...this makes me really, really uncomfortable. I'm the youngest in my family, and at 22 my mother just turned 60. At what age should women just no longer have children if they feel they want (and are now in a place to support) more children?

I don't know much about this candidate, and I'm 100% sure that some very very legitimate criticisms will pop up, regarding to policy issues, voting record, and stated beliefs. This post feels like a personal attack and a grasp in the dark, and I wouldn't have expected to see it here, or from you.

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by Alecto

Um...this makes me really, really uncomfortable. I'm the youngest in my family, and at 22 my mother just turned 60. At what age should women just no longer have children if they feel they want (and are now in a place to support) more children?

I don't know much about this candidate, and I'm 100% sure that some very very legitimate criticisms will pop up, regarding to policy issues, voting record, and stated beliefs. This post feels like a personal attack and a grasp in the dark, and I wouldn't have expected to see it here, or from you.

I am child #3 (pregancy #7) of a 38 year old mother (at the time...not now) and the father of three (the last two twins) so maybe I'm not in a position to say this but... perhaps after two healthy children EVERYONE should stop? The planet is not able to support an infinite number of over-consuming Americans. In terms of consumption and pollution and greenhouse gas emissions the US is the most over-populated nation in the world.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

.....and I do find it laudable that Sarah Palin chose to raise a Downs syndrome child when so many women these days abort fetuses diagnosed with Downs.

Maybe I'm confused at what you're saying here. Aborting a fetus because it has Downs Syndrome seems very cruel.

Rick

[nmwolfboy]

Ostensibly Palin is pro-contraception, but is adamantly anti-abortion. It doesn't seem accurate to refer to her position of reproductive choices as pro-life, since she's also a strong support of the death penalty.

One of my closest childhood friends has Down Syndrome. The significant majority of individuals with Down's have only mild to moderate cognitive impairment. Unless there is severe or profound impairment or other significant related problems physiologically (there's a higher incidence of heart defects for instance) i don't consider Down Syndrome to necessarily be an adverse condition.

i have no idea what the circumstances were with Sarah Palin's son, Trig, other than that pre-natal testing indicated he might have Down Syndrome. Since those tests have a 2 to 5% incidence of false positives, and the follow-up testing (usually amniocentesis) can induce miscarriage, i certainly don't fault her choices with respect to Trig.

Regardless, this has nothing to do with her suitability to be a heartbeat away from being the POTUS. i find McCain's choice of Palin as a running mate to be more of his characteristic (and frankly insulting) pandering. She has no national or foreign policy experience, and has only been a city councilor and mayor of a small town (pop. 5,470 as of the 2000 census) and Governor of Alaska for less than two years, an office she holds after receiving less than 115,000 votes. Her lack of qualifications for the Vice Presidency is alarming, and seriously calls into question Senator McCain's judgment. Then again, she may not make it through the vetting process or even secure the nomination during the Republicans' Convention.

Pax,
scott

[Alecto]

Originally Posted by nmwolfboy

Regardless, this has nothing to do with her suitability to be a heartbeat away from being the POTUS. i find McCain's choice of Palin as a running mate to be more of his characteristic (and frankly insulting) pandering. She has no national or foreign policy experience, and has only been a city councilor and mayor of a small town (pop. 5,470 as of the 2000 census) and Governor of Alaska for less than two years, an office she holds after receiving less than 115,000 votes. Her lack of qualifications for the Vice Presidency is alarming, and seriously calls into question Senator McCain's judgment. Then again, she may not make it through the vetting process or even secure the nomination during the Republicans' Convention.

Pax,
scott

OMG THIS. Also, I found it ridiculous that he would pick her after all the criticism of Obama as being "inexperienced". When I brought that up to my parents, of course, my mom came up with "A lot of times it's governors that end up doing better". (She's kinda crazy/irrational with the Obama hate)

[nmwolfboy]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Aborting a fetus because it has Downs Syndrome seems very cruel.

It's so tragic and sad, but according to a study published in 1999, 91% - 93% of pregnancies with a pre-natal diagnosis of Down Syndrome were terminated. Since i'll never be faced with considering any such choice, i feel compelled to withhold judgment of those who are.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by nmwolfboy

Since i'll never be faced with considering any such choice, i feel compelled to withhold judgment of those who are.

Well said. This is pretty much how I feel too. I consider myself to be a liberal Democrat and support a women's right to choose.

At the same time, I have also known people with Down Syndrome and for them have been denied the right to live because they were defective seems terribly cruel.

Abortion is a very emotional issue for many people, especially the women faced with making the decision. Since I'm a gay man, I feel lucky that I will never be faced with this difficult choice.

I also feel lucky that I was born before doctors could determine if a fetus was homosexual. Otherwise, I might not be here typing this.

Rick

[Gennee]

There are children with Down's Symdrome in my church. I admire and applaud the families for loving and raising them. I applaud Mrs Palin for doing the same.

Gennee

[Daniel]

I remember when my aunt, who is in her 60's now, became pregnant, and subesquently had two children. This was more than 25 years ago.

Her sister had a child with down's syndrome, and I remember my aunt dealing with this issue- it was during her pregnancy that the first pre-natal tests became available. It was a radical thing back then, to have the kind of 'choice' that has become available, that is, to bring a child with down's syndrome to full term or not. In her case, she did not have to make that choice. Her children were 'normal'.

I think one of the things that can be forgotten here is the responsibility in caring for a child, especially one which faces special challenges. And how one faces that challenge may not be a test of moral character as much as it is refective of one's economic status in life.

Ms. Palin may have the ability to care for such a child when others do not. Does that make her a saint or somehow worth emulating? I do not think so.

It remains a fact that poorer people have less options in life. Poor women are more inclined to give up their children of adoption, whether they have special issues or not. And it a reality that terminating a pregnancy may be the only viable option. What is cruel- to my mind- is to assert that she should not have become pregnant in the first place.

The mother who gives up her child may be exercising just as much faith as those who have all the riches in the world. In fact, she may have more faith: she is hoping and praying that someone can give her child what she cannot.

In sum, I would say that Ms. Palin's actions are wonderful, but are not less worthy of reflection as those who have to choose a harder and more painful road.

[tymejumper]

Some people do not believe in prenatal testing, especially if they are very anti-abortion. I have a Catholic friend whom refused all tests because she felt that whatever God sent, was what she got and had no intention ever of aborting no matter what. Even though I felt it was a foolhardy decision to not know so she could at least be prepared,(with health, OT, PT and ST if needed) I do support her stance of not wanting to abort for any reason. I am stauncly pro-choice, so we don't discuss it much, unfortunately. We just will never agree.

The bigger issue with Palin is my concern about her bigotry towards gay persons. She cast the sole veto for denighing same sex couples of employees of the Alaskan government health benfits and protections for their partners.

[Steven E. Webster]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Maybe I'm confused at what you're saying here. Aborting a fetus because it has Downs Syndrome seems very cruel.

Rick

I don't disagree with you. Please note that I said her decision to give birth to the child was "laudable"--that means "praise worthy." I, too, feel uncomfortable with people choosing to abort children due to genetic testing. Many Downs syndrome folks live very productive lives.

What I am giving voice to are my own personal values---I believe in birth control and limited families. I believe women should be able to have their children when they are young and in good health and can bring healthy children into a world where they will be cared for.

I disagree with the notion of some evangelicals that women should refuse to use birth control and should have as many babies as "God sends them"--I think that's irresponsible. Those are my values.

Personally, I was one of nine children in a large farm family. We were all born between 1950 and 1970. We were, as in most farm families, our family's substitute for hired help. It was not a bad life--but those days are in the past. Now-a-days one or two children are enough. If you want nine or ten, then adopt.

Steven Webster

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

I see another way my words might be misinterpreted. By "birth control," I do NOT mean abortion. Abortion, in my view, should not be used instead of birth control. I am not pro-abortion. Abortion is an unfortunate choice, in my view, but I am pro-choice.

Steven Webster

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

From my original post:

[quote]Is Palin one of those extreme right-wingers who believes that all birth control is wrong? I was shocked to discover that there is a faction within the Christian Right that opposes all birth control--is that where she is coming from? Some of the more extreme policy-makers appointed by the Bush Administration opposed all birth-control. Is this what we can expect in a McCain-Palin administration--more of the same?[/qoute]

This is what concerns me. Does Palin represent that element in the Bush Administration that is not only anti-abortion, but that is also opposed to ALL birth control? Is she part of that faction that wants to give pharmacists the "right" to refuse to fill women's prescriptions for "the pill"? Will she deny birth control information to High School girls? Will she deny emergency contraception to college women? These are all real issues now-a-days (though I scarce can believe it!)

Steven Webster

[tymejumper]

[QUOTE=Steven E. Webster;59956]Friends,

From my original post:

Is Palin one of those extreme right-wingers who believes that all birth control is wrong? I was shocked to discover that there is a faction within the Christian Right that opposes all birth control--is that where she is coming from? Some of the more extreme policy-makers appointed by the Bush Administration opposed all birth-control. Is this what we can expect in a McCain-Palin administration--more of the same?[/qoute]

This is what concerns me. Does Palin represent that element in the Bush Administration that is not only anti-abortion, but that is also opposed to ALL birth control? Is she part of that faction that wants to give pharmacists the "right" to refuse to fill women's prescriptions for "the pill"? Will she deny birth control information to High School girls? Will she deny emergency contraception to college women? These are all real issues now-a-days (though I scarce can believe it!)

Steven Webster

That is what I am scared of, as a woman. Obviously not for me, my wife can't impregnate me. I do have two daughters. I see Palin as a very extreme right-wing conservative. It worries me a lot. I don't believe anyone is the medical profession should be able to put their relious belief before their jobs. Why don't some female pharmasist refuse Viagra and Cialis to men? After all, when God decides that you can't get it up, it's time to quit!

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by tymejumper

The bigger issue with Palin is my concern about her bigotry towards gay persons. She cast the sole veto for denighing same sex couples of employees of the Alaskan government health benfits and protections for their partners.

There is another thread that discusses this issue. Current information indicates that Palin vetoed a law that would have prevented health benefits and protections. However, this was not done because she supported gay rights.

See here: http://www.soulforce.org/forums/show...21&postcount=7

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

Friends,

From my original post:

Is Palin one of those extreme right-wingers who believes that all birth control is wrong? I was shocked to discover that there is a faction within the Christian Right that opposes all birth control--is that where she is coming from? Some of the more extreme policy-makers appointed by the Bush Administration opposed all birth-control. Is this what we can expect in a McCain-Palin administration--more of the same?[/qoute]

This is what concerns me. Does Palin represent that element in the Bush Administration that is not only anti-abortion, but that is also opposed to ALL birth control? Is she part of that faction that wants to give pharmacists the "right" to refuse to fill women's prescriptions for "the pill"? Will she deny birth control information to High School girls? Will she deny emergency contraception to college women? These are all real issues now-a-days (though I scarce can believe it!)

Steven Webster

The blog in the following link is in keeping with the concern here- asking a torrent of questions- perhaps not in the most polite way- but I do agree with the author in that the public needs to know what Palin believes and thinks about.

From the HuffintonPost, Jane Smiley's column on Palin, titled Make Her Whine, strikes to the heart of the matter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-s..._b_122648.html

[tymejumper]

Originally Posted by Daniel

There is another thread that discusses this issue. Current information indicates that Palin vetoed a law that would have prevented health benefits and protections. However, this was not done because she supported gay rights.

See here: http://www.soulforce.org/forums/show...21&postcount=7

Yes, that is what I meant to say. I didn't write it very well. It looked as if I was saying thet she vetoed it in support of gay rights, but she actually veoted it so we could not have the same rights. Even though the law to ban same sex marriages was in place before she took office, she cast the veto that banned us from having the same rights as heteros in Alaska.

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

Now-a-days one or two children are enough. If you want nine or ten, then adopt.

And how would you suggest enforcing this 'one or two' limit? What happens if a third pops up? On what do you base this limit? Didn't China have a policy about this? Are you suggesting that we follow their lead?

I know that several members of these boards have more than one or two children. What do you say to them?

[nmwolfboy]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

Friends,

From my original post:

This is what concerns me. Does Palin represent that element in the Bush Administration that is not only anti-abortion, but that is also opposed to ALL birth control? Is she part of that faction that wants to give pharmacists the "right" to refuse to fill women's prescriptions for "the pill"? Will she deny birth control information to High School girls? Will she deny emergency contraception to college women? These are all real issues now-a-days (though I scarce can believe it!)

Steven Webster

Reportedly Palin is pro-contraception. So far i haven't found any source that states her position specifically on emergency contraception. Given the other values she is on record as espousing, it wouldn't be a surprise if she's pro-contraception but opposed to emergency contraception, since it's not uncommon for some in the pro-life movement to view emergency contraception ('morning after pill', 'plan B', etc.) as de facto abortion.