I’m still reading lots of blogs and other sites about prenatal testing and Down syndrome, and Matt has joined me on several. I still haven’t sorted everything out, not in my own head and certainly not so that I can write conclusively about it.

I have started wondering what tests I would agree to have done, if Matt and I have another baby. The standard blood tests, the triple- and quad screen, only predict your risk for Down syndrome; previously you have had to had an invasive/risky amnio or CVS for a definitive diagnosis. OBTW: the triple or quad screen or whatever I had for David – completely normal results, no risk indicated. The new test that I’ve been blogging about is supposed to offer a definitive diagnosis with just blood work from mom. Would I want that? Not particularly. Our OB told us she was certain David had Down syndrome because of several things she saw on the ultrasound, and I guess that’s the answer to the question for me – I needed to know what she saw (heart defect and problem with blood flow in the umbilical cord), but I don’t think any blood test would have provided any additional critical knowledge. The doc went on the assumption that he had Down syndrome and I did too – knowing “for sure” wouldn’t have done much for us.

I’m sure any future pregnancy would be considered high-risk, at least initially. I’m sure I’ll have to have another fetal echocardiogram and several detailed ultrasounds, for the same purpose – to make sure there’s nothing that would affect plans to deliver at a certain hospital, to mentally plan for heart surgery, etc. And those’ll tell me what I need to know – that there is or is not a condition that puts the baby’s survival at risk. Blood test, schmud test.

If the (theoretical) baby is delivered just fine, will they still want to do a chromosome analysis? Could we refuse it? Why would we do that? I don’t know, just running through the million or so possibilities.

I will end with a vignette from Law & Order, which I’m sure will make Matt giggle (I mean, I already told him about the episode, but my L&O addiction is the subject of a fair amount of teasing, and the fact that I’m writing about it will make him smile). The actual outcome of the case (a bomb at a doctor’s office) was pretty farfetched (shocking, I know), but a slight side-track was: the doc in question did genetic research and testing, and the cops found out he was being sued by a couple who received an amniocentesis result that was positive for Down syndrome, had an abortion, and then found out the results were wrong. In the ensuing interviews, the couple revealed they had been trying to have a baby for 7 years and the wife had 2 miscarriages. Jesse Martin’s character, Ed Green, was giving them a hard time about the abortion, and he said, “You know, life’s not bad for Down’s kids these days – maybe you should have played the hand you were dealt!” We learn later that Ed once got a girlfriend pregnant and she had an abortion after a positive amnio for Down syndrome, and he didn’t want her to do it.

So, sorry to quote a TV show, but that is a good summary for me – life’s not bad for [kids with Down syndrome] these days. It’s really not.

Spoiler alert – Matt’s sermon this Wednesday will discuss this topic to an extent (theme for Lent – human limitation)

So it turned out the actual issue was the doctor claimed to have developed a prenatal screening test for homosexuality. Again, the way in which this played out was pretty ridiculous, but it is the slippery-slope thing. Who’s up next for extermination? Would crazy-religious people (which I know are a small portion of the pro-life movement) feel any differently about ridding the world of gay people?

See “Rutabagas” for further discussion of various measurements of human worth. I think that’s where I may shift my focus to. A pretty reasonable-sounding woman commented on an article that (a) she has a child with Down syndrome; if she got pregnant again she would want to know for sure just to prepare herself (b) the test is not required, it’s optional, and she does not foresee a future in which either the test or abortion would be required (c) the test is information, which is neutral. It’s what doctors and pregnant women do with the information, and (d) evidently plenty of women are willing to incur the (small) risk of miscarriage from an amnio to find out for sure – why not eradicate the risk?

A much larger discussion of fear and defense mechanisms and value and worth and whatnot will come, hopefully in small pieces. But for tonight, it’s 11:10 and I’m kinda tired.