The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has recently issued a new guideline
suggesting that every mom-to-be, regardless of her age, undergo a
screening test for Down syndrome. As the mother of a 3-year old
who happens to also have Down syndrome, this new guideline is of
particular interest to me.
The previous guideline recommended
prenatal testing at or above age 35, but the age delineation has been
dropped because the medical community finally got wise to what moms and
dads have known all along, that there is no magic jump in the incidence
of babies born with Down syndrome at the maternal age of 35.
Indeed, though there is a gradual statistical increase in risk -- from
one in 1,200 at age 25 to about one in 300 at age 35 -- women under 35
actually give birth to most of the babies born with Down syndrome.
The
newest testing method is a
first-trimester screening that combines blood tests with an
ultrasound exam, called a "nuchal translucency test", that measures the
thickness of the back of the fetal neck. The test is performed between
11 and 13 weeks gestation, and is considered "more than 80% accurate". Although
this is all well and good, and may well avoid some unnecessary
amniocenteses and therefore the fetal risk associated with that more
invasive test, I have to wonder -- what exactly are people going to do
with this new information?
I had no prenatal testing with my
son. If I had done so and the test correctly suggested that my
son would have had Down syndrome, I would have immediately been
bombarded with pressure from all over to "do something" about the baby,
to "make a decision". Hello? What, exactly, is there to
do? A baby is a baby. Where do you draw the line?
Babies with Down syndrome are "okay", but babies with, say, more
serious issues, or expensive-to-treat medical issues, are not?
Or, a baby with Down syndrome would be okay, but only if he is
"high-functioning". Right?
For perhaps the first time ever
I can say I side with a Catholic group who states, "...it could lead to
women seeing that because their child has a genetic defect that they
would seek an abortion". Since when did eugenics creep so stealthily into our accepted
medical midst? What happened to "inclusion" and
"diversity"? Is this, really, where we as a society wish to
head? Take another look at that baby up there and then tell me.
