1. Good
2. Good
2.5 What's money got to do with anything? Seriously...
3. My point exactly - define SEVERELY handicapped my friend...
4. Your write "Whose QOL is more important? That of the fetus (won't go into the discussion of when the fetus becomes a child) or that of the parents/family?" which again, is what this article and I am talking about... First of all, since when is raising a child convenient to the parents - and go into the discussion of when a fetus becomes a child, it doesn't pertain one damned bit to the discussion at hand. The reason it doesn't pertain is that you can abort THESE fetuses (feti?) up until birth and EVEN THEN, it still doesn't have anything to do with this discussion about the WORTH of the child be they born or unborn. Secondly, 80% of the children who's parents find out their child has Down Syndrome beforehand abort (extremely conservative estimates). Down Syndrome is not necessarily or even often SEVERELY HANDICAPPED. My daughter, for example, (although only three) has an estimated IQ of between 75 and 85 (far fucking greater than most of the posters on this board! ;-) ) She didn't walk until the last few months. She only speaks about 100 words... I'm willing to wait. I mean, what's the big hurry?
4b. Taking your points, how do you reconcile your views with the elderly? You skipped that one (which was a major point of my initial rant, don't wish to comment?) They are a burden to our health care system and non-productive and not only that, unlike most retarded folks, they ain't even happy... Is it that we just like to torture these fucking old disabled people until their money runs out? What's their quality of life? AND, AND unless the ravages of age don't allow anymore - they can VOICE THEIR OPINION AND WISHES... Ditto for "should their heirs be forced into no inheritance and or they themselves be forced into bankruptcy?" I mean, do you see a just a little hypocrisy here?

AND, since you like hypothetical questions, what happens if your perfectly normal child gets hit by a car at two? Ah, let's not go TO EXTREME CASES LIKE SOME OTHERS DO, how about if he/she gets one of the hundreds of infectious diseases that cause a plethora of handicaps such as mental retardation, lameness, blindness, and so on. Or slides down a slide headfirst or trips or skis into a tree or... or... or... Do you off them there on the spot? He's going to be a huge financial drain on his parents and, God forbid, society... He may still be happy but he ain't going to be productive... And what kind of quality of life will the poor bastard have being blind in a seeing world. Etc. etc. etc. A little consistency is all I'm asking for.

My biggest complaint about all of this however is this... what happens if the parents of a "handicapped child in the womb" are misinformed or just plain dumbasses like most people. Or, without the rhetoric, what happens if they are smart people with no experience and or bad information (whether intentionally given or not)? Do you see that maybe insurance companies might have an agenda that may not be necessarily impartial?

As it turns out, the day after I wrote this, I read that there is a bill in the US congress now that will limit the amount of self serving disinformation that is given to parents when they find out their expectant children have a disability. It is heartening to those of us who have been blessed to associate with children and adults with disabilities. FWIW, society needs these children and adults very much, if for no other reason, to keep sight on our own humanity. Unless, of course, they are Democrats or Republicans...