here, you can read it if you want to-->http://www.newsweek.com/id/194589
If you don't want to read it, thats fine, I'm going to summarize it. Its about this older woman whose decided not to have kids, she's wanted kids, but she won't do it. Her two sister's died at ages 8 and 27 because of life threatening diseases, diseases that were genetic. She said that when she got married she thought about having children, but she knew the facts... she had a 67% chance of passing on one of the diseases to her own child. She knew she couldn't be that selfish.
This brings me to my neighbors, the Stacy's. They have 4 boys, three of which are completely "normal" one who cant even talk. Matthew must be around 4 or 5 now. last time I saw him he was 2, and he couldn't even sit up. He has a feeding tube, an IV and has to be carried around everywhere. He doesn't have the spine functionality to be able to sit in a wheelchair. Whatever has put him in this condition is a rare genetic disease, one which lies in BOTH of the parents gene pools.
He is their third child. Their fourth, who is now around the age of 2, is fine. She's also pregnant again. I understand the want for a big family, I wish I was old enough to have a family all the time. I love kids, and can't wait until I can have my own, but I would never play the cards like they are. I believe that its selfish to the fullest extent. Putting a child in this world knowing that there is a high chance of it suffering its entire life is the worst thing a parent could do. The author of the article said so also.
I don't know, maybe they don't read into the statistics too heavily, or maybe they haven't even thought about it. It sure does upset me though.
No comments:
Post a Comment