Pages

Wednesday, November 11, 2020

We Asked, You Answered: Learning from Defeat

The Colorado state capitol building

Sadly, Colorado's Proposition 115—which would have finally prohibited medically unnecessary late-term abortions (five months or later) in the state—did not pass. Although Election Day did have some bright spots, like the passage of Louisiana's Love Life Amendment and the election of numerous pro-life women to Congress, the inability to pass even the barest protection for babies in the Centennial State is extremely discouraging. We wrote on Facebook:
For those of you who live in Colorado, give us your thoughts on why Prop 115 failed and what pro-lifers should do for the next round to have more success. This defeat is very frustrating and sad, but we are in this work for life, so let's review and prepare for the next fight.
Here are a few of the many responses, and it didn't take long for a theme to emerge:

Hope R.: I saw no ads in support of prop 115 that I can recall. And the ads against it were full of misinformation. I saw several ads claiming "it's an intentionally confusing proposition" and so called doctors claiming "it will restrict my ability to provide care to save the mother’s life." Lies were shoved in our faces and very little was said about the truth. 

Amy B.: Straight up there was NO money spent on it! I only saw two yard signs, no TV ads, no print ads. Nothing. People decided they'd rather throw money at candidates (some of whom are objectively terrible people) than at making actual substantive progress on abortion restrictions. I think if I'd heard actual facts from the pro-life side of the ballot issue it might have been different but all I heard was straight up crickets! Deafening silence from the ballot measure supporters. (And I run in pro-life circles and live in a conservative area of the state, so if I heard/saw nothing you can guess that most others got even less).

Keri K.: Big abortion money, completely lied on commercials about the bill, said Yes on 115 would not help those with medical issues, rape, ban all abortions essentially. Yes on 115 did not have any TV presences to combat this messaging

Hope R.: I saw no ads in support of prop 115 that I can recall. And the ads against it were full of misinformation. I saw several ads claiming "it's an intentionally confusing proposition" and so called doctors claiming "it will restrict my ability to provide care to save the mother’s life." Lies were shoved in our faces and very little was said about the truth.

Julie M.: I only just moved to CO, but from NY. (Please don't hate on me I married into the state, lol.) I wasn't following any polls but expected it to fail and was surprised at how well it did. I saw only ads against it, and they got "better" (more persuasive) with time, whereas I only heard of vote yes through word of mouth and a sign waver or two. The pro-life movement here needs to reach beyond its solid base and explain the brutality so that in a state getting darker blue, people still vote their conscience and not their party on abortion. Public opinion is on our side, but pro-life strategy needs a lot of work.

Ellen C.: Honestly, there wasn't a good ground game past getting it on the ballot (and even that was shaky), and the abortion lobby was FLOODING the field with their propaganda.

Jesse B.: No one is going to want to hear this, but here goes nothing. Prop 115 failed, because people are tired of pro-lifers actually just being pro-birth. You want prop 115 to pass (which I voted yes on, so calm yourselves), but many of you stay on one side of the aisle for all other issues. Maybe if we could show people that we care about babies inside the womb, outside the womb, the babies who need WIC, and the babies who grow up to need college assistance by no fault of their own, our voices would be louder. Try voting away from party lines, and I guarantee you will bring many more people to the table to hear you out on abortion.

Sarah N.: Pro aborts lie through their teeth to convince people that these laws will criminalize miscarriage. Also Colorado has had several personhood amendments that were poorly written and failed miserably. So the left just ties these ballot initiatives together with the personhood. They say stuff like how many times do we have to vote this down. We will reject this again. The uniformed voter is easily swayed by this nonsense. On top of that most people have no idea what abortion is much less late term abortion.

Jay G.: I don't know that it was made clear that Colorado is an outlier here. We're one of a small handful of states that permit abortions so late. And comparing to other world democracies, most European countries permit most early abortions and prohibit most late abortions. I think too many people assumed "any restriction on abortion is a radical proposal," without comparing to other standards.

Megan H.: People need to be educated on the fact that no medical condition is treated by abortion. Most people I’ve talked to about it, including my pre-med niece who lives in Boulder, are under the impression that late term abortion is used as treatment for medical conditions.

Samantha L.: A lot of people seem to think the majority of these abortions are fetal anomalies. That's what I heard in my circles. We need to address that piece. Did I also see that the opposition completely over spent us?

[Photo credit: Wikipedia image of Colorado State Capitol, Creative Commons license]
 

Monday, November 9, 2020

California University Maintained Eugenics Fund for Abortion, Prenatal Screening


The chaos of the election drowned out a disturbing recent story in the Los Angeles Times. The article exposed a fund at the University of California Berkeley that was specifically designated for research in eugenics. The "Genealogical Eugenic Institute Fund," active since 1975, has been suspended due to public outcry. 

Times author Teresa Watanbe correctly notes that eugenics was "discredited after World War II as a horrifying ideology that sought to use science to improve the human race by promoting traits deemed superior and breeding out those judged undesirable. The judgments aligned strongly with social biases that favored white, able-bodied and financially stable people. Eugenics was used as a justification for Hitler’s Nazi Germany to kill 6 million Jewish people, and U.S. authorities to forcibly sterilize more than 60,000 people in California and more than 30 other states largely in the early 20th century."

The fund offered $70,000 a year to projects "related to family planning . . . prenatal screening . . . [and] abortion," which UC Berkeley acknowledged as the "modern" version of eugenics. This doubtless would have been in keeping with the donor's wishes. Abortion, particularly in combination with prenatal screening for "search-and-destroy missions" against babies with disabilities, is absolutely a eugenic project. The article cites Alexandra Minna Stern, a University of Michigan expert on eugenics, who notes that parents can choose "what kinds of humans they deem most desirable and should be selected to live. . . . Embryos with genetic markers for Down syndrome, for instance, may not be selected or may be subsequently aborted."

UC Berkeley is now trying to backtrack, claiming that "[n]o evidence has yet surfaced that Berkeley used the money for eugenic research." Watanbe writes: 
Since 2000, about $1 million has been drawn from the account. The disbursements include $138,325 for the school’s budget deficit, $72,647 for financial aid for low-income students, $575,999 for student support and staff salary and benefits, $123,212 for travel and conferences, and the rest on office supplies, operations and journal subscriptions.

In recent years, the funds were primarily used by one faculty member, who has denied using them for eugenic research — an assertion supported by a review of the person's academic activities, [School of Public Health Dean Michael C. Lu] said. The dean declined to name the faculty member because the fact-finding review was ongoing.
The article does not elaborate upon the staff members whose salaries were covered or the types of conferences funded. Were these abortion researchers and abortion conferences? There must also be full disclosure concerning the faculty member who made primary use of the fund. Extra scrutiny is warranted because UC Berkeley's sister school, UC San Francisco, is a notorious hub for pro-abortion extremism, including gruesome research on the body parts of late-term abortion victims.

UC Berkeley is reportedly seeking "feedback on renaming and repurposing the fund." Several excellent suggestions have been proposed, such as using the fund to "increase financial aid for underrepresented minority students, support research with communities that have been disproportionately harmed by the eugenic ideology and establish an institute to stand against eugenics and racism." The pro-life community will need to keep a close eye on UC Berkeley to ensure that the fund is truly transformed, and does not promote abortion and ableism in any form.

[Photo credit: Wikipedia image of UC Berkeley's Sather Gate, Creative Commons license]

Friday, November 6, 2020

Book Review: "When You Became You"

When You Became You is a beautifully illustrated children's book by Brooke Stanton and Christiane West. The authors are affiliated with Contend Projects, "a secular, nonpartisan, science education nonprofit with the mission to spread accurate information and awareness about the biological science of human embryology and when a human being begins to exist." 

Secular Pro-Life president Kelsey
Hazzard poses with a copy of
When You Became You
I'm pleased to report that When You Became You lives up to this promise. It is 100% secular and scientifically accurate. Young readers will learn that all humans are human, and that it does not matter "what you look like, where you are from, how old you are, how young you are, if you can talk, if you can walk, if you can dance, or even if you aren't born yet." They will also learn the scientific terms "embryo" and "fetus" and how those words are used to describe human beings before they are born. These core concepts are an incredibly valuable way to inoculate children against pro-abortion propaganda; however, the text does not refer to abortion or anything else that might upset a child. 

I do have one quibble with When You Became You, which is that it doesn't directly answer the question implied by the title. The only reference to the moment of fertilization is a blurb on the back cover. I was expecting an explanation of conception, even if it required childlike language like "a teeny tiny bit from Mom called an egg and a teeny tiny bit from Dad called a sperm." Perhaps the authors wanted to avoid their work being pigeon-holed as yet another sex education book for kids, which is fair enough. That said, there are some lovely watercolor images of very early life that parents could use to embark on a more detailed conversation. 

When You Became You is a great addition to the small but growing canon of pro-life children's literature. It officially releases on November 10 and is available for purchase at Barnes & Noble, Amazon, and Books-A-Million

Tuesday, November 3, 2020

October Recap

 

Projects
Monica has continued her work promoting social media for Colorado's Prop 115, which would put an end to the barbaric practice of killing viable pre-born children. If you live in Colorado or know people who do, make sure they remember to vote YES ON 115. Similarly, if you live in Lousiana, make sure to vote YES ON AMENDMENT #1: the Love Life Amendment.  It will ensure your state courts will never have the ability to "find" a right to abortion or taxpayer-funded abortion.

Monica is also starting to put together a comprehensive list of all the ways people can participate in pro-life work. If you are on Facebook, we encourage you to comment here with your thoughts and read about some of the suggestions we've already gathered for supporting sidewalk counselors and pregnancy resource centers, and advocating for adoption reform and legislative reform.

Monica also had a little too much fun getting into the spirit of the season with her Halloween pro-life memes (scroll to the end of this email to view a selection of them).

Kelsey was a featured speaker at the National Pro-Life Campaign Conference in Ireland, online of course.  Her talk can be seen here.

Terrisa rallied at the Department of Justice bringing attention to the fact that #PPSellsBabyparts and that the DOJ hasn't prosecuted these crimes. She also rallied at the Supreme Court to support the confirmation of the first pro-life woman to the Court: Justice Amy Coney Barrett. 

Our polar opposite... but a good, civil conversation. See the pic on FB here.


Twitter
We gained 343 new followers, bringing us to 12,973 total. We sent 213 tweets, which were viewed 458,000 times. Over 22,000 people viewed this one that underscores why we care about prenatal children.
 
Original tweet here.
Facebook
In October we gained 1,449 followers, bringing us to 34,756 total. Our content was viewed over 385,000 times, including 41,400 views of this post emphasizing the number of women who aren't about to vote for a pro-choice candidate. Pretending pro-life women don't exist is probably not a great election strategy.
See the original post here.
Blogger
Our three most-read blog posts for October in increasing order:If you have something to say about abortion from a secular perspective, we want to hear it!  Guest posts help us cover a more diverse range of perspectives, topics, and experiences. If you have a piece you'd like to be considered for posting, please email us at info@secularprolife.org.

Thank you to our supporters
Thank you to those of you who donate to help support our work.  SPL is run by a number of dedicated volunteers and we would not be able to devote the time and energy without the help of donors like you. 

If you like what we do and you want to see more, please consider donating: 
Paypal

If you don't use Paypal, you can also go to our Facebook page and click the blue "Donate" button under our cover photo on the right. 

Finally, some of Monica's most popular October memes. Happy (late) Halloween!

Monday, November 2, 2020

We Asked, You Answered: Navigating Abortion Discussions in the Workplace

We posed this scenario to our Facebook followers:

Scene: You're at work. Coworker A starts casually repeating pro-choice talking points to Coworker B, clearly in earshot of you and several other coworkers. Coworker B agrees politely, though doesn't seem particularly invested in the conversation. They commiserate on their general dislike of pro-lifers and their perceptions of the weaknesses in pro-life arguments. None of the other coworkers participate. How, if it all, do you respond? And why would you respond the way you do?

Here are a few of our favorite responses.

Michael W.: "Would you be surprised to learn I'm pro-life?" They usually are. Then they tell you about their misconceptions of pro-lifers (how they're "not like you") and you can politely shoot them down one by one.

Patty J.: I am the only pro-lifer at my workplace. Some co-workers are more open-minded than others. This issue (and many other leftist political issues) come up a lot. I pick and choose my battles and consider how these battles will impact the work environment. Luckily I am respected professionally so my differing views don't lead to harassment.

Sophie T.: I've never existed in the same universe as shy, so I'd approach them and out myself as pro-life. I'd then try to engage them, but especially Coworker B, in conversation about what being pro-life really means to me and debunk some of the stereotypes. It's hard to hate and fear people if you actually know them, if they're names, faces, and personalities instead of just an ideology. Just like the pro-choicers always say you probably know someone who has had an abortion, everyone knows somebody who's pro-life.

Nat K.: I've been in these shoes. I simply said "I believe life begins at conception and the government's primary job is to protect life. In order to change my mind, you have to draw a hard line between conception and death where life actually begins." Nobody ever has.

Sarah F.: This actually happened once, in a setting where getting into a big argument would have been a huge problem. I didn't say anything because I was afraid that once I got started I would actually start screaming at them (I was pregnant at the time, and they knew it).

No Termination Without Representation: I would close my eyes and meditate till I felt ready for a calm and powerful response.

Melissa M.: Depends greatly on the dynamics and personalities involved in the scenario. A lot of the time I hear people talking about abortion in public, they're feeling troll-y and angling for a spat. Not a great use of time and energy to chase that rabbit.

Rachel S.: "I'm pro-life!" Most are too passive to actually take up debate with you, especially at work. If they do, the easiest way to address any untrue/feeble opinions about a group of people is to say, "but I fit under that ideology, and I don't think that. This is what I, and friends like me actually think," and continue from there.

Nicole C.: I'd probably point out that this kind of conversation is NOT work appropriate. I'd mention that I am pro-life and would gladly have a conversation OUTSIDE work sometime if they wanna go over pro-life arguments but NOT at work.

Lauren M.: Sometimes I don't outright speak against, I'll engage in a conversation based on common ground issues, or I'll say I consider myself a "pro-life feminist", or something along those lines, which often brings on intrigue rather than disdain. It kinda depends on the vibe, however I will almost always respond in some way and ultimately bring it back to women deserve the world to wholly embrace our biology rather than convince us to follow male biological standards ingrained in society. Also, focusing on contraception is a big common ground!

Nicole P.: I'd let it slip at some point that I volunteer at a pregnancy center while at work one day. Then I'd mention all the amazing pro life things the center does.

[Photo credit: Brooke Cagle on Unsplash]

Friday, October 30, 2020

What to Watch for on Election Day

Silhouette of voter casting a ballot

Tuesday's election is a critical moment for the United States. We're all aware of what's at stake for the presidency. Donald Trump and Joe Biden's positions on abortion are well-known. Pro-life advocates have good reasons to fear that a Biden administration would, among other things, kill the Hyde Amendment; that policy change alone would cause an additional 60,000 helpless children in the womb to die every year. 

President Trump's re-election prospects seem statistically unlikely, but we know from 2016 that anything can happen. It's also possible that, with many Americans voting by mail this year, we won't know the winner right away. We wish to emphasize that no matter who occupies the White House, Secular Pro-Life, and the pro-life movement as a whole, will continue to defend the defenseless. When President Obama took office, pro-life advocates wisely directed their attention to the state level and achieved numerous life-saving victories. We will need to be similarly creative if Biden wins. On the flip side, a Trump win must not make us complacent! We must hold all politicians accountable to their promises. With Roe on its last legs, we should be prepared for the abortion industry and its allies to engage in desperate or even violent and illegal tactics, like smuggling dangerous abortifacient drugs. And of course, efforts to educate the public about the brutal reality of abortion, and support individual families facing crisis pregnancies, will continue no matter what. Secular Pro-Life isn't going anywhere!

Let's not allow the presidential race to keep us from seeing the big picture. Control of the Senate is also up for grabs, which could have a huge impact on the federal judiciary. Elections for state governorships and legislative bodies are also critical, especially if and when the Supreme Court reverses Roe v. Wade and returns abortion policy to the states. 

And last but certainly much not least, there are two important ballot initiatives on abortion this year. In Colorado, Proposition 115 (the "Due Date Too Late" amendment) would prohibit medically unnecessary abortions in the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth months of pregnancy. Colorado currently has no gestational limits and is a mecca for shady late-term abortionists like Warren Hern. That kind of extremism is opposed even by many pro-choice people. In Louisiana, Amendment 1 (the "Love Life" Amendment) would recognize that the state constitution does not consider abortion to be a "right" and would keep abortion legislation in the hands of voters and their representatives, rather than pro-abortion judicial activists. 

Abortion is a society-wide human rights injustice, and history tells us that such injustices can take a long time to correct. This is a marathon, not a sprint. Let us savor the victories, bounce back from the losses, and keep pushing ahead with a firm commitment to the equal right to life of all human beings at every age. 

[Photo credit: Element5 Digital on Unsplash]

Wednesday, October 28, 2020

March for Life Chicago has big plans!

January will be here before you know it. For pro-lifers, January is a season of mourning, marching, and organizing, as we mark the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. And although the national March for Life in Washington, D.C. is the best-known Roe memorial event, there are also numerous state, local, and regional pro-life marches to accommodate pro-life people from all parts of the United States. 

We've already written a bit about how the 2021 national March is changing due to COVID-19. But today, we want to spotlight the March for Life Chicago — a longtime hub for the Midwest pro-life movement — because its approach is something really special. They've taken the mandate of safety and turned it into an opportunity for greater engagement. The solution they came up with is ingenious.

The March for Life Chicago is doing a road tour with a series of smaller events throughout the Midwest region. The tour will feature parking lot rallies in partnership with local radio stations so people can listen to pro-life speakers from their cars! They will also organize diaper drives, protest caravans outside abortion centers, and related events.

The following tour stops have been announced, likely with more to come:

  • Madison, WI on January 2
  • Omaha, NE on January 10
  • Fort Wayne, IN on January 16
  • Chicago, IL on January 23

The primary organizer is weDignify, a pro-life student organization based in Illinois. They are working with a coalition of pro-life groups throughout the region. And although we are not based in the Midwest, Secular Pro-Life is proud to co-sponsor this fantastic series of events. At one of the stops (TBD), participants will find something from SPL in their goodie bags!

Stay tuned, and keep marching (safely) for life!

[Photo credit: March for Life Chicago on Facebook]

Monday, October 26, 2020

Crossing the Pond, Virtually!

Irish young adults hold pro-life signs

Secular Pro-Life is based in the United States of America, but we have been incredibly fortunate to cultivate strong relationships with pro-life advocates around the globe. Thanks to the magic of Zoom, SPL president Kelsey Hazzard will soon speak at two international events!

(1) Kelsey will give remarks at the Irish Pro-Life Campaign's 2020 National Conference this Saturday, October 31. The all-virtual conference will take place from 11:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. local time. The conference theme is "7,000 Too Many," recognizing the horrific increase in abortions since Irish children in the womb had their constitutional right to life stripped away with the repeal of the Eighth Amendment. The Irish pro-life movement has much work to do. Registration is free

(2) On December 14, Kelsey will speak to pro-life students and young adults in the UK. The presentation, which will be at 19:00 (7:00 p.m.) local time, is entitled "The Secular Case Against Abortion." Kelsey's talk will be the fourth in the UNIfied series of pro-life lectures, organized by the youth arm of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) and SPUC Scotland. UK students will also get to hear from Destiny Herdon-De La Rosa (New Wave Feminists, November 2), Elijah Thompason (Dank Pro-Life Memes and The Fetal Position podcast, November 15), and Stephanie Gray Connors (Love Unleashes Life, November 30). 

[Photo credit: Pro-Life Campaign on Instagram]

Friday, October 23, 2020

A Beacon of Hope: Abortion Advocates Admit Roe's Days are Numbered

Young pro-life advocates stand outside the Supreme Court, wearing judicial wigs and robes and carrying signs in support of Judge Barrett's confirmation.
Photo credit: Students for Life of America on Facebook

It looks like a nightmare pro-abortion horde is about to take over this country. According to polling, the presidency, House and Senate will all be controlled by a gang of people whom I might actually prefer on healthcare and the environment, but whose abortion agenda starkly consists of (1) an additional 60,000 feticides a year on top of the present toll, (2) abortion till the moment of birth, and (3) crushing and humiliating pro-lifers by forcing them to help out in the slaughter through their tax payments. The nightmare gang that is coming is likely to pack the Supreme Court, flooding out whatever Justices may exist who have pro-life leanings, and thereby extinguishing whatever fragile flame of promise has recently been lit.

But less than a month ago an opinion piece appeared in the New York Times, written by a pro-choice law professor, Joan C. Williams, and titled "The Case for Accepting Defeat on Roe":

We’ve basically lost the abortion fight: If Roe is overturned, access to abortion will depend on where you live — but access to abortion already depends on where you live. At the same time, we have people voting for Donald Trump because he’ll appoint justices who will overturn Roe. Maybe it is time to face the fact that abortion access will be fought for in legislatures, not courts. . . .

. . . Often forgotten is that RBG herself had decided that Roe was a mistake. In 1992, she gave a lecture musing that the country might be better off if the Supreme Court had written a narrower decision and opened up a "dialogue" with state legislatures, which were trending "toward liberalization of abortion statutes" (to quote the Roe court). Roe "halted a political process that was moving in a reform direction and thereby, I believe, prolonged divisiveness and deferred stable settlement of the issue," Justice Ginsburg argued.

Meanwhile, just a week ago the famous and influential former NPR host, Garrison Keillor, wrote on Facebook that Roe v. Wade was not "worth fighting for anymore":

[It has] torn the country asunder. . . . to what good? . . . We can accept a system of states’ rights, whereby abortion is legal in some states, illegal in others. . . . R v W is a toxic issue that has poisoned our politics for almost 50 years.

(He soon replaced that post with a toned-down version, but he probably continued thinking what he had said in the first place.)

And two years ago we saw Megan McArdle's "It’s time to let Roe go":

I am myself uneasily pro-choice. . . .

But. . . . I’d be glad to see Roe go, as quickly as possible.

How can someone who calls herself pro-choice oppose Roe v. Wade? Let me count the ways.

The decision itself is a poorly reasoned mess. . . .

That poor drafting quasi-accidentally left America with some of the most permissive abortion laws in the world, far beyond what most legislatures would permit if the matter were open to public debate. . . .

And that, in turn, is the biggest problem with Roe: It has given the most religious developed country in the world one of the world’s most permissive abortion laws. . . .

The abortion law is out of step with what the majority of the population wants, and given the seriousness of what's involved, it is Roe, more than any other opinion, that is driving both the radicalization and the judicialization of American politics, as pro-lifers fight like caged tigers to amend the law through the only avenue left open to them. . . .

Pro-lifers can say that abortion ought to be outlawed even in cases of rape and incest, knowing full well that they'll never have to look a rape victim in the face and explain why she had to carry her attacker's baby to term.

Pro-choice advocates, meanwhile, don't have to directly advocate allowing second-trimester abortions; the Supreme Court removed that burden.

No wonder abortion politics are so polarized and poisonous.

Ending Roe would be a Godsend, or whatever the atheistic equivalent of a Godsend is, for the psychological health and happiness, and structural cohesion, of the US of A. And I think that the time was bound to come when even those who feel they have benefited from Roe could see that. Even ardent pro-choicers must understand at a moment such as this, election season 2020, that the country is sick and needs healing. So I am hopeful that the "let Roe go" time may now have come.

The end of Roe will not mean the end of abortion or the automatic restoration of the right to life. Reversing Roe will place abortion policy in the hands of legislators and voters in each state. But at the very least, letting Roe go would save a substantial number of small Americans — possibly 300,000 a year, according to a recent pro-choice estimate — from the unnecessary deprivation of the long lives and unknowable possibilities on which they were just about to set out. Pro-life states will then have the great moral responsibility to be a beacon of hope for the rest of the country, by proving once and for all that women and children can thrive without abortion.

[Today's article is by Acyutananda. If you would like to contribute a guest post, email your submission to info@secularprolife.org for consideration.]

Wednesday, October 21, 2020

When she got a prenatal Down syndrome diagnosis, her doctor wouldn't stop suggesting abortion.

The author and her family.

Kaylen

Before Kaylen, my husband Darrin and I were happy to be average—to not stick out in a good or bad way. Darrin worked as a mental health clinician in a prison; I had quit teaching after our second child and was running an in-home daycare. Our two sons were school age, our daughter was still home with me, and we had just started considering a fourth child when I took a positive pregnancy test.

I was 35 and had two prior miscarriages, so my doctor considered mine a higher risk pregnancy. During the first ultrasound my daughter was amazingly active and I thought “Whoa—something is different with this kiddo.” I loved the chances to see her on ultrasound and hear her heartbeat, and she grew and measured as expected. Everything was proceeding in the average way we were comfortable with.

Since I was now of “advanced maternal age,” in the second trimester the doctor recommended a triple screen blood test. I felt that any additional information was helpful, so I agreed. Not long after, I received an almost tearful phone call from a nurse who said “I’m so sorry to have to tell you this, but your blood test shows elevated risk. We’re sending you to a perinatologist for more information.” She apologized repeatedly and sounded so upset that I ended up reassuring her that it would be okay. Some quick internet searches told me that false positive results for the triple screen were relatively high. In fact I had two friends who had received positive results only for their babies to be born without issues. They reassured me that it would all be fine and suggested I just enjoy a 4D ultrasound.

I went into the office of the perinatologist (I will call him Dr. X) fully prepared to receive good news and leave with some great pictures. I enjoyed the 4D ultrasound—I got to relax in a darkened room and see my baby in more detail. The technician measured body parts while answering all my questions about what she was doing. When she finished, she went to get Dr. X. He entered the room, and I knew something was wrong as soon as he started with “Unfortunately…”

They found that she had some “soft markers” for Down syndrome, such as shortened long bones and fluid in a certain part of her brain. I still wasn’t clear on the odds; I thought she had perhaps a 1 in 300 chance of having Ds, but Dr. X said it was more like 1 in 4. That was when I knew our life would be different. She might not even survive to birth, and if she did, my husband and I would join the alien group of “parents of children with disabilities.” The doctor gave me a long list of negative health conditions involved with Down syndrome and emphasized that carrying a baby with Ds increased my risk of miscarriage. He emphasized it shouldn’t be hard for me to get immediately pregnant after an abortion if I wanted to “try again for a normal baby.”

I hate uncertainty, so I asked about getting an amnio to find out for sure. Dr. X said there were three reasons people had amnios: if they (1) were considering terminating (I shook my head and said “We’re not going to do that”), (2) would be too stressed out by the uncertainty (“Yup, that’s me”), or (3) would change medical and birth plans based on the information, for example switching hospitals or doctors (“Yup, me again.”). He discussed the risks, including the risk of miscarriage, but also said he had never had a patient miscarry because of an amnio, and he had done thousands of them. I said “Well, this is still my first.” Still he said he could do it during that same visit, so I began filling out the paperwork. He emphasized that if I did decide to terminate, we’d need to find out quickly because I was nearing the cutoff date. I told him flatly that there was no way we were going to kill our child. He performed the amnio and said they had to mail the sample to the lab and we should have the results in about a week.

I rushed from the building to my car and burst into sobs. I felt as if everything comfortable and sure in my life was gone. My joy in carrying my baby was now replaced with stress and worry. I was angry at myself for needing the reassurance of the amnio, but I also had the grieving thought “Well maybe if she does have Ds and I miscarry, that would be sad but okay,” followed by the question “What if she doesn’t have Ds and I cause her to miscarry because I wanted to know for sure?” I was sickened and ashamed that I would even think that way, as if somehow her life was worth more if she had the typical number of chromosomes and less if she had one extra.

Eventually I was able to stop crying long enough to call Darrin, but when he answered I couldn’t even speak. I burst into tears again. He said “Oh wow. It didn’t go well.” I gulped “I think she has it. I did the amnio.” He said “She? It’s a girl?” I only then realized the doctor had referred to our baby as “her” when we hadn’t yet known the gender. I had been too preoccupied with thoughts of how our life was going to change in so many unknown ways. I asked Darrin “What are we going to do?” and he calmly answered, “Well, we’re going to love our daughter.” And suddenly I didn’t feel so alone in our new reality.

I collected myself and drove to a friend’s house. I told her about the testing and the amnio and she said “I trust a mom’s intuition about these things. Do you think she has it?” I admitted that I thought so. Somehow, admitting it to someone other than my husband gave me peace. She hugged me. We moved on to conversation about childhood memories and had a wonderful visit. Being able to mix conversations about my disabled child with “every day” topics was just what I needed—it was the beginning of adjusting to my new normal.

Over the next few days, Darrin and I researched Down syndrome as we prepared for how our lives might change. We picked out her name and kept our new secret from the world. Two days after the amnio, Dr. X called with the results. He again began the conversation with “unfortunately,” but actually finding out for sure that our daughter had Down syndrome made me smile. Now we had information and could move forward. Dr. X reiterated that if we wanted to terminate, we had to get scheduled quickly. I told him to stop mentioning abortion because we weren’t going to kill our child, and he responded that he just wanted to make sure that we knew all of our options.

My next perinatologist appointment was for a fetal echocardiogram to see if our daughter was in the 50% of children with Ds who need heart surgery. I was excited again, though with more caution. The technician did her work, but this time when the perinatologist entered, it was a different man (I will call him Dr. Y). As soon as Dr. Y walked in he congratulated me on my daughter. His response was a beautiful reminder that I was carrying a little person and not just a list of medical problems. He said that he had a sister with Ds and that raising a child with Ds would be more similar than different from raising our other children. He made sure we had a good support system and plenty of resources, and he invited us to an upcoming Walk for Ds fundraiser.

Dr. Y showed me the same list of medical issues that Dr. X had emphasized, but this time Dr. Y also pointed out that people with Ds don’t end up with all of these issues; some have just a few and some have more. He suggested we try not to focus on the negatives, pointing out that even ‘typical’ children have medical issues and parents just deal with them as they come up. He said those challenges do not define the child, and each person with Ds is an individual with his or her own talents, skills, and interests. Dr. Y’s support and encouragement made all the difference. He made us feel as if we had been accepted into an elite group: the group of people who know and love someone with Down syndrome.

We told our immediate family of Kaylen’s diagnosis but waited a bit to make a public announcement. Some family members prayed that Kaylen would be healed of her bonus chromosome before she was born. I believe that they were trying to be supportive and helpful, and that there response came from lack of experience with Ds and a desire to spare us from extra challenges that her diagnosis would bring. We told them we were okay with her having Ds, and asked them to change their prayers.

The rest of the pregnancy involved some poignant and pointed moments mixed in with everyday life. An online friend who had recently had a daughter with Ds signed me up for a statewide Ds group that sent a large box of information, resources, and books. I dug through it feeling thankful for all the resources, and then happy cried when I found an adorable little pink dress at the bottom. It was nice to have others acknowledge the ‘sweet little baby girl’ part of the pregnancy. At one point I sat in the doctor’s waiting room while another pregnant mama loudly spoke on the phone, telling someone how hugely relieved she was to have “passed” the test and learned her baby didn’t have Down syndrome. From time to time people would ask if we were going to find out the gender or didn’t have a preference “as long as it’s healthy.” How do I answer when I know most people wouldn’t consider my baby “healthy”?

It took us some time to decide how to announce Kaylen’s diagnosis—we didn’t want it to be her defining characteristic but also didn’t want to suggest we were hiding or ashamed of it. We announced on social media that our daughter would be born with an extra chromosome. There were a few “I’m so sorry” comments but overall the support and congratulations were encouraging.

I found a lot of support. I learned of old friends who also had children with disabilities, and our pediatrician connected me with two local moms of children with Ds. We also joined statewide and national Ds groups to hear perspectives from people with experience. And through online parent support groups, I connected with new friends from around the world who were in the same situation I was. To my surprise, the majority of comments in these groups were celebrating successes and offering support and encouragement. Most of these moms considered themselves part of “the lucky few,” and the most frequent challenge seemed to be trying to get society to value people with differences, especially those with visible cognitive disabilities.

My pregnancy continued with increased monitoring. We switched to a hospital that had an OB/GYN who specialized in high-risk pregnancies and a NICU so we wouldn’t be separated if Kaylen needed extra help after she was born. The OB/GYN was scheduled for vacation on Kaylen’s due date, so we scheduled an induction the day before. The drive to the hospital felt like a sweet farewell to our life’s familiarity and a journey into the unknown, but it wasn’t so scary as long as we were together.

I had read that babies with Ds sometimes have trouble nursing, so I chose not to have an epidural which might make her more sleepy and less likely to latch. I was induced and Kaylen was born 3 hours later. While they were cleaning her up and giving her oxygen, the nurses sang her “Happy Birthday” and my heart nearly burst with joy.

The next few years were more ‘typical’ than we originally expected. There were more medical appointments that first year, but we took each one as they came and learned as we went. One difference between raising Kaylen versus our other children was how we celebrated more of the little things. Milestones and accomplishments were HUGE because of all the step-by-step work it took to reach them. We also felt more relaxed and free to not keep up with anyone else. Of course, there were and still are some twinges of grief when we see a gap between where her peers’ development and her own. We try to embrace the idea that “comparison is the thief of joy,” but there are still moments of grief over the loss of the way that we thought life would be and over moments when people see her only for her disability, instead of getting to know her as a unique person.

Lilly
Still, overall the gap between Dr. X’s grim outlook and our joyful experiences inspired us to support other people in our situation. We decided to get our foster care license specifically to accept children with Ds. We were told it was highly unlikely a child with Ds would come into our foster care region, so we also got a private adoption home study and we registered with NDSAN (National Down Syndrome Adoption Network). NDSAN counsels families who receive a prenatal Ds diagnosis; it also matches families who want to adopt a child with Ds to such children available for adoption. NDSAN’s goal is to ensure every child born with Down syndrome has the opportunity to grow up in a loving family. We waded through paperwork and training and then waited… and waited. After about a year we began considering looking for another way to help, but then the phone rang and NSDAN appeared on our caller ID.

I felt like I had stopped breathing. I answered, and the voice on the other end said, “It’s a girl!” We had been matched with a baby girl to be born the following month in a neighboring state. We waited in nervous anticipation until we got the call asking if we could pick up our daughter.

When Lilly was placed in my arms, I wasn’t prepared for my reaction. I felt the same amazing love for her that I felt at the birth of our biological children, but I simultaneously felt heartbreak and overwhelming loss for Lilly’s birth mom. She chose a family she felt could better navigate caring for a child with Down syndrome; the magnitude of her love for her child still brings me to tears. We have since learned that adoption is not simply placing a child with parents, but actually melding two families. We feel as though we also adopted Lilly’s first parents. They love her fiercely, and we keep connected through email and social media.

I wholeheartedly believe our family is better and stronger for having children with disabilities. Most days are just a beautiful normal, and I feel as if I’ve stepped out of the ‘rat race’ onto a more peaceful, leisurely path that is filled with all kinds of beauty. It’s as if I never realized I was colorblind until I put on glasses that showed me color. Also my priorities have changed. Conflict was always uncomfortable for me, but having children with disabilities has brought my ‘Mama Bear’ much closer to the surface; I’m now quite comfortable standing up and advocating for my children. Growing up, I had never been around many people with disabilities, so I didn’t know how to act or what to say, but I am learning.

Parenting Kaylen and Lilly has mostly been like raising our other children. Lilly loves books, playing outside, dancing and singing, and playing with friends. Kaylen is now fully included in her 3rd grade classroom. She thinks Lilly is annoying when she makes loud noises and likes it when her older siblings play games with her. There is a stereotype that people with Ds are happy all the time, but the reality is that they experience a full range of emotions, like all of us. Kaylen and Lilly do seem a bit more honest and without pretense.

Parenting our ‘typical’ children alongside Kaylen and Lilly has had good effects too. I believe they are more likely to include people of all kinds because of their siblings. In fact researchers Richard Urbano and Robert Hodapp found that parents of children with Ds are more likely to stay together and medical geneticist Dr. Brian Skotko found that siblings find rich value in having a family member with Ds and nearly 99% of people with Down syndrome are happy with their lives. All of this data beg the question: why does society (and the medical community) encourage abortion in cases like Kaylen’s and Lilly’s?

Follow-up questions:
What are your thoughts on prenatal testing for Down syndrome?
There’s no one right answer. For me, prenatal testing was a tool to help me prepare and reduce the stress of the unknown. For a good friend of mine, the test results weren’t going to change anything for her, so she declined and got her daughter’s diagnosis at birth. I’m glad to note that prenatal testing is improving. Right after Kaylen was born, researchers developed a less-invasive blood test with very high accuracy and no risk of miscarriage. I don’t think prenatal testing is inherently a problem; the issue is how society uses the test results and doesn’t protect and value life.

What would you say to a parent who just received a Down syndrome diagnosis?
When I got our diagnosis, I immediately felt unqualified and feared I would be a bad parent. That’s not an unusual response. Find support teams—both online and in-person, if possible—to ask questions, vent to, and celebrate with. Know you don’t have to be a super-advocate. Your life can just continue on in the regular, everyday way it does now. There are days when we don’t even think about Down syndrome. You’ll learn to parent as you go, just like parents do with any other child. 

What would you say to someone who would be inclined to abort in the event of a prenatal Ds diagnosis?
I would want to invite them over for coffee and to meet our girls. I would encourage them to first learn about Ds and make sure they don’t have an ill-fitting stereotype in mind (as most people do). And then if they still believe that they’re not ready to parent a child with Ds, I would steer them towards NDSAN and encourage them to find a family for their baby.

Additionally, medical professionals need updated information on Ds and training on how to provide a diagnosis. It would be great if the person giving the diagnosis also had some awareness of what life as a person with Ds is actually like. I believe if expectant moms were given updated, encouraging information instead of doom and gloom, it would make a huge difference.

[Today's guest article is by Kim C. If you would like to contribute a guest post, email your submission to info@secularprolife.org for consideration.]

[Work to ensure doctors respond appropriately to prenatal Down syndrome diagnoses. Read more here, from HowToBeProLife.com.]