Thoughts on Dr Andre Lalonde & Trig Palin

Update:  the SOCG has added a news release on its home page regarding Dr Lalonde's remarks in the Canadian press.  Excerpt:

More work is required to ensure that this high termination rate is not a reflection of unbalanced or directive counselling from health professionals. To this end, the SOGC is committed to conveying these messages through its ongoing member communications and continuous professional learning opportunities.

Update:  Barbara Kay has an article here in the National Post.

Update:

It seems that Dr Andre Lalonde's organization, the SOGC, is, well, a bit ambiguous when it comes to being pro-choice or pro-life, or whatever label you want to use. 

“The SOGC remains firmly against the practice of sex selection through selective abortion,” Dr. Don Davis, the group’s president, said in a release. “These new technologies are finding their way to Canadian women and are opening the door to a number of ethical questions.”

 from the CBC

At least one Canadian physician called the SOGC on this ambiguity around "ethical questions".  In a letter to the editor (pdf) which can be found via SOGC's website, we have:

SOGC Statement on Gender Selection

To the Editor: Recently, the SOGC published the opinion that abortion for gender selection not be performed but that abortion after counselling for neural tube defects and Down syndrome, as well as other congenital abnormalities,should continue to be supported. Both the condescending nature of this opinion and the frightening implications require a response.

For years the SOGC supported the right of a woman to choose whether she would seek an abortion. At no time did that support place restrictions on the indications the individual woman would apply to her own circumstances. The societal pressures to terminate a pregnancy come in many forms, whether they are to have a male child or to finish high school. They are equal in that in the end it is one woman who must make the decision and then have the procedure. Either abortion for all reasons as deemed appropriate by the woman is acceptable or no abortions are acceptable. We may disagree with gender selection on the grounds of our Western perception. However we do not have the right to say which cultural assertion is best.  The frightening part of the opinion was the support for eugenics, which bothers me because the SOGC has stepped back from supporting abortion on demand and instead is supporting the removal from society of those deemed inferior.  I am ashamed.

Richard Gruneir, MD, FRCSC, Leamington, Ontario

REFERENCE 1. SOGC Council and Executive. SOGC Statement on Gender Selection.  SOGC Policy Statement, No. 198, November 2007.

It is really worth reading the SOGC's response to this letter (same pdf).  There, we see words like "feticide" in the same sentence as "infanticide".  Does that imply an equivalence to you?  Or only when it refers to abortion due to gender selection?

Well, either they are really concerned over how Trig Palin will affect the "abortion issue" in Canada, or not.  And if one is pro-choice, then one is pro-choice.  Apart from all the other factors, it's the consistency and logic that one should worry about.  The worry is that a governor's son will influence the abortion issue in Canada.  Perhaps the worry is that Trig Palin will take that role away from the SOGC.

[orig post]:

Michael Gerson over at the Washington Post:

Many parents, of course, are not "prepared to deal with the consequences" of having a child, healthy or disabled -- though this has nothing to do with the worth of such children once they are conceived. Down syndrome children are slow to learn and have physical challenges. They are also, in my experience, often loving and compassionate -- which is an advantage they have on Dr. Lalonde.

A claim like this one tears away the pretense of "choice" among some in the medical community. When the medical establishment encourages doctors to encourage broad genetic testing for genetic abnormalities, then emphasizes the hardship of raising a disabled child, eugenic abortion is not merely an "option" but a recommendation. And people such as Sarah Palin, who resist the consensus against the elimination of "genetic abnormality," become a bad example, instead of a heroic one.

This difference clarifies the most basic question of medical ethics: How do we improve humanity? By eliminating the "imperfect" from among us? Or by showing our humanity, especially toward the "imperfect"?

Disability News has picked up the story.  Some local folks who have adopted a child living with Down Syndrome have added their voice.  Which, by the way, seems to me to be at least one important option which I have yet to see Dr Lalonde endorse.  But perhaps he has, and I would applaud him if he spoke strongly for that option.  However, I have yet to see his support for options in the choice market.

LT Barta (who points us to the Down Syndrome Association of Central Texas - DSACT) added this comment in another blog:

Lalonde’s comments are not neutral. They are not detached. They are not professional. And they certainly don’t indicate a thoughtful review of the alternatives and benefits available in the 21st century. Lalonde has failed in his duties to the general public. Instead, he used his day in the spotlight to generate fear and limit choice.

My full thoughts in a related post on Dr Andre Lalonde's reaction  to Trig Palin here,  along with links to some of his other interviews in the Canadian Press dating back to January 2007.

Comments

[Tim]

The really scary stuff is in the comments section to Gerson's post.

[Leslie]

The terrible elements of what Dr LaLonde suggests spread out in many directions, one which is also the idea that parents are clueless and confused. I find that the medical and certainly educational professions if not left in check, tend to look upon parents as breeders who need professional help as to what to do with the spawn/biochemical reaction that has emanated from them (regardless of ability)

It is evidence of an inorganic way of looking at life. Placing things out of order. And this disorder may either manifest itself in terms of a childless teacher handing out parental advice pamphlets at school or doctors advising abortion after the test results are in. Either way, the roles are out of order.

As a society, we've got a lot of thinking to do as far as what is the purpose of life and the role of the family if we're going to realign things.

[joseph]

Tim - the comments are really something, aren't they?

Leslie - I find that advocacy is really one of the most important, and yet sometimes the most resisted, roles that a parent can take.

[Ann Marie Nicklin]

I have a real concern with society's apparent need for perfection. Certainly in this particular article it is getting pretty dangerous. But it is in other areas of our lives.

I think of my sister who went through a devastating break-up a few years ago. There was a prescription for effexor right away and it was harder coming off the drug than dealing with the emotional trama of the break-up. We aren't allowed to mourn in public and heaven forbid that a tragedy in our lives should ever make itself known it the work place.

The husband of a friend of mine died a few years back. She is a priest and was assistant to another priest at the time. The priest figured my friend should be over the tears part of mourning in a mere 3 months.

I had another friend whose family contacted me because she was having periods of heavy mourning a few months after the death of a close family member.

Society does not want to have to see that the world is not all sunshine and roses. It happens on a number of levels. I believe the Church needs to speak up about this. Society wants surface perfection - it is not as concerned about what may lie underneath. It's all an illusion and I firmly believe that we, as Christians, have a much more realistic outlook about imperfection and the hope of God's transforming grace.

[joseph]

If there is one thing I've learned along the way, it is that we are all broken.

[Tom]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPF1FhCMPuQ

Amazing story of abortion survivor Gianna Jessen
Part 2 is on the link

[Kate]

Ann Marie, it sounds to me like the doctor mis-prescribed Effexor. However, for people who have genuine clinical depression (ie feeling like you've just had a major breakup or like your best friend has died, when there is NO objective reason to feel that way). It is no exaggeration for me to say that anti depressant medication gave me my life back. I am shocked that the priest thought that the tears part of mourning should be over in three months! It is different for everybody, and there is no should.

[Kate]

argh. After the brackets it should read :Effexor can be a life saver.