Timkins,

I really wish you would stop running the line that all a woman need do if she wants to have an abortion is ring the clinic and make an appointment and, tra-la-la, that will be it (might just squeeze it in between a facial and a massage, and all those other selfish things nasty "career women" like to do).

Firstly, you present the doctor-patient relationship in an overly simplistic way. I'm assuming you've never had a pre-termination GP appointment and therefore wouldn't know who is asked what.

Secondly, it is an option which (in NSW for instance) is increasingly only available to those who can afford the $500-odd fee associated with it.

Thirdly, the deception of women who are trying to access balanced information about their options on continuing a pregnancy are continually made complex by organisations purporting to give "pregnancy advice" who refuse to canvas a full range of options with women who ring them. I say congratulations to the Democrats, who have introduced Federal legislation to make these services more transparent.

Lastly: none of these arguments about the availability of abortion services apply to women seeking terminations of pregnancy due to severe physical abnormalities, abnormalities which can only be detected using ultrasound at a much later stage in pregnancy. Terminations performed beyond 14 weeks are, as I have said, extremely rare (less than one per cent) and in every case, are subject to extraordinary consultative processes and referrals.

Back on topic: I do agree that creating a child to your exacting physical specifications is fraught.

However, like enaj, I'm not willing to sit in judgement of parents who make the hardest decision they will ever have to make in deciding whether to continue with a pregnancy - anyone who has got to the stage where these tests are being done is having a child that is wanted: the questions they ask themselves in evaluating their options are not easy to answer and I don't envy them that decision.

Seether,
Unfortunately it is a fact that there are abortion clinics in Australian that will carry out an abortion without referral from a doctor.

“To make an appointment phone the clinic closest to your area and staff will give you an appointment at a suitable date and time. It is not necessary to have a referral from your doctor however it is important that you have had a pregnancy test, have written proof of your blood group and Rh factor. If you don't have this, blood tests can be arranged by the clinic.” http://www.abortionclinicgoldcoast.com/100189.php

Your insinuations that I regard women who have an abortion as "career women" are your words only, and I would be asking you not to make such unsubstantiated inferences and insinuations in the future.

I would think it statistically unlikely that 2 out of 5 pregnancies are aborted because of severely deformed foetuses, but it is impossible to clearly tell what is occurring because so few records are being kept regards abortion, which is a very serious matter when so many other medical records are kept.

Within the area of genetically modified children, it can become a slippery slope. The system can start off by saying that there should be genetically modified children to overcome the possibility of deformity (although what constitutes deformity is subjective), and then the system can progress to genetic “enhancements” for the child.

It is all very dangerous stuff, because manipulation of DNA would have a sea-saw effect. Artificially enhance some part of a person’s genetic make-up, and this would likely negatively affect some other part. Nature has found a balance over many 10,000’s of years, and it would be very unwise for man to interfere with that balance.

btw - has anyone actually met anyone who is perfect? i sure haven't.

I’ve not read any of Julian Savulescu’s articles. My comments are based on the information & posted commentary, I have read upon coming across this site.

Let’s not pretend that ‘not being perfect’ (most would agree this’s impossible), is even in the same league as having a disability that is recognisable by an individuals society / community.

Do any of us seek to be accepted, valued, & seen as independent & able, only by our own families & loved ones?

Living with a disability, for most, is an uphill battle, with unfulfilled acceptance by the community, regardless of how hard an individual (or their family) may work to realise the same life responsibilities, goals & aspirations as members of the community who do not have a recognisable disability (the majority). - For many people with a disability, life does not enable a chosen career (if any) that supports a chosen lifestyle, a circle of friends, a loving & sexual relationship, anonymity to go about one’s daily business, freedom of choice to ignore or engage in matters of personal, societal or world matters.

Should the focus of debate be on the benefit to individual parents of having & loving a child, regardless of that child’s potential for a reasonably ‘fulfilling’ life? Should the focus of debate be on the advantages or financial disadvantages to a society that embraces a ‘diverse’ community?

I think there’s a difference between knowing & loving an individual family member based on their capacities, abilities, values, foibles & personality as opposed to an unborn, unknown entity whose only relationship to its parents is ‘blood’ & a dream of what might be.

If asked the retrospective question, would the parents of a child with a disability have chosen a child who does not have a disability?

I wish that Australia (and the world) had different priorities in what I believe ‘really’ matters. However, I’m concerned that we are forcing people who are known to have a disability prior to birth, to be ‘pioneers’ in challenging our community to accept / embrace diversity, at a significant cost to themselves.

I would like to venture - Do we really need to worry? For every Julian Savulescu of whom I had never heard until I read this forum article, there are many institutions working on saving the lives of babies born with abnormalities or suffering from abnormal births; charities collecting for and endeavouring to improve the conditions of sufferers of diseases such as cerebral palsy, osteo arthritis, Downs sydrome, etc. etc.

Every day that I am home and every night at dinner collectors phone for donations and sometimes we donate, like the responsible citizens that we are.

Also, every night on TV we have our emotions challenged: by stories about 'suffer the little children', who mostly seem to come from normal nuclear families. I am guessing poor people don't generate as much sympathy for fund raising, not that poor people don't have the same problems.
Occasionally by the exceptions too, where some darling tot has just survived the impossible through the intervention of modern medicine, and who, we are told, 'will now go on to live a normal life'. How amazing!

And then there are test tube babies and the IVF programs where couples who would not normally have a child are now able even though there are children available to be adopted.
I can't believe that noone has Sometimes wondered about the future survival of fitness of the human race.

Un natural selection is alive and well and will continue to thrive in our midst; a leading IVF scientist over 20 years ago advised a gathering at which I was present that if it can be done, when it comes to scientific advances and experimentation, it will be done - he has been proven right - albeit slowly the doors to eugenics are opening.
The scientific imperative that drives researchers to see how far they can push the envelope with only scant reference to the community is now coupled with rampant consumerism - babies are a commodity, they are an investmetn in the future and in many cases an accessory we include in our array of possessions after the house the car the entertainment centre and the boat - and because we have so few these days they'd better be good ones - or we send them back or find some one to sue.