Choosing sex, the next great leap in selfish parenting

Bitten says:

08:27am | 29/07/10

I’m not sure, but I thought the point of the article was to point to sex-selection as the next step down a path we are already on as a society - where having children is seen as a lifestyle choice for parents and the mentality of participants is fed more and more by an emphasis on choices that suit THEM rather than choices that suit the CHILD. Which does tend to feed a growing selfish attitude among adults in society who are having children where it is all about how it makes the parent feel and the child itself is more of an afterthought. It’s not unreasonable to assert that such attitudes seem less likely to foster good parenting than an attitude focused strongly on the child as the main point of the entire exercise

We already have obstetricians and their staff daily suffering abuse from aggresive parents-to-be. To quote a case experienced by a friend of mine “If my wife doesn’t get pregnant this time, I’ll f*ing kill you!” Nice. What a great parent that guy is going to be. And the sort of woman who considers a man like that to be the craft with which to entrust the cargo of life’s happiness? These women are typically more interested in getting cutesy 3D pics of the foetus than letting us adequately image the foetal heart. Women insist on getting pregnant when they’re morbidly obese, putting their child at grave risk with their altered blood chemistry in utero.

None of that sounds like people making decisions about the baby as their first priority - it just sounds like people doing exactly what suits them right now, damn the consequences for anyone else. To be a good parent, you do need to be able to put the child first. Genuinely first. To make the hard calls and stick to the decisions. Buying lots of toys for a kid and writing a blog about how great the baby makes you feel is superficial parenting - the kind that more and more people seem to indulge in, these days.

KH says:

08:31am | 29/07/10

These people (outside of those trying to avoid genetic illnesses, which is fair enough) are looking to feed their own fantasy.  It might be they are looking for their ‘heir’ to take to the football, or their little princess to dress up and so forth.  Take the woman who I assume we are referring to from recent weeks - she has three boys, but now wants a girl.  Why? Not happy with the three healthy children you have? What do you want a girl for - it isn’t for ‘balance’, its for their own selfish desire to have a child that lives up to their fantasies.  Most people I know who have aired their preferred gender for their child have these kinds of reasons - they speak of how they will pass on their wedding dress to their precious daughter, or play football with their precious son - in other words, what they will be doing, as if the child will not have any personality of their own.  That is selfish, because it is about them, not the child.  It doesn’t seem to occur to these people that their precious heir might be gay and hate football, or the princess prefers dressing like a boy and taking up a mechanics apprenticeship, or never gets married.  These people tend to only speak of what they will do with their child - one woman I know had already scoped out ballet schools and bought dresses and stuff.  She had a boy, and she seemed a little resentful, which is really sad.

Samuel says:

08:48am | 29/07/10

Did you read the article or just the headline?  I’m not sure if you noticed, but the whole article backs up the assertion.  Here’s a summary for you:  having children is not like buying a car.  Parenting is not designed to make parents feel good.  It’s about the good of the child.  Selecting the sex of a child is usually about what the parent wants and reflects a self serving attitude to parenting.

iansand says:

08:51am | 29/07/10

Apparently I missed out on the direct connection to universal knowledge of everyone’s motives.  I will withdraw from the field gracefully, and leave it to those who have the advantage of that connection.

Bitten says:

08:55am | 29/07/10

Why the sarcasm? I thought I raised some pretty legitimate points. Come on, play with us!!!

Henrietta says:

09:10am | 29/07/10

Don’t you think its funny that nature takes care of the 50:50 ratio for us…I wouldn’t want to start tinkering around with that. Just think about whats happening in China.

I have one sister-in-law who has had three boys, another who has had three girls. What if only one of those families gender-balanced their family and the other didn’t?

donna says:

11:08am | 29/07/10

All of you do not know what you are talking about until you live it ! I am a mother of five girls wow you say but I only wanted one boy not much to ask but it did not happen I think if gender selection was available I might have done it but I am finished . To anyone out there who has an opinion on this matter should have kids first and then decide

Mistress D says:

12:15pm | 29/07/10

It’s selfish because it’s about what the PARENT wants not what the child wants or what is necessarily good for the child. IVF is a wonderful thing, but can we try and remember that it’s there to assist nature not to twist it into something else?

Donna, my father only wanted a son. It was the only thing that really had him excited about me existing. He loves me, he wouldn’t trade me, but if he’d had the choice at the time I have no doubt he would have opted for gender selection and my parents would have had a boy.  That would mean I wouldn’t exist. Now let me ask you, which of your girls would you give up to have a son instead?

Ricardo says:

12:22pm | 29/07/10

@Donna,

Dear Donna,

If you had the choice, which one of your 5 girls would you swap for that boy you desire so much?

We get to used to what we have. Paraphrasing Chesterton - just think of living without something you have - a leg for example - and you will appreciate it the way you should.

R. Gordon says:

03:29pm | 29/07/10

Thanks for telling it how it is, Tim.

j says:

04:56pm | 29/07/10

@ Stephanie,

Kids are a PERSONAL choice, so dont whinge and complain that the government isnt handing out cash for you to be a stay at home mum.
You should already be considering your income and whether or not you can afford kids before you bring them into this world. Besides, parents already recieve some benefits that never seems to be enough for whingers like you.
Instead why dont you be grateful for the fact that your husband’s job allows this choice, or better yet why dont you get a part-time job so you can have the best of both worlds and quit complaining!

Eric Vigo says:

10:49pm | 29/07/10

I can answer that one.

First, are you a parent, iansand? If so, then next time you are in the playground, observe most of the parents. Many are engrossed in four things:
1) their mobile phone (the majority of mothers do this)
2) the Daily Telegraph (yes, not the Age or SMH)
3) ignoring, then rapidly overbearingly paying attention to their kids
4) playing some hyper-dysfunctional track in their head that revolves around guilt, shame, embarrassment and abandonment. Over and over again.

The parents seem unlikely to contemplate their actions. It looks pretty set.

I’d call it Helicopter Parenting, but it’s more than that. The parents are either engrossed in themselves or their friends. And that is pretty much what the kids understand the world is like. The parents friends are more important than ‘boring’ them, so when they are in their 20s and 30s, they will likely do exactly the same thing to their kids.

Go on, iansand, next time you are in a playground, watch what they do. It will be a combination of the above, or something similar. And the relations between the kids and their parents will not be close. It will be a shouting vs pouting relationship. Or swinging widely between passive and aggressive.

We are, as always, not allowing our kids to be what they are, and watching them. So we will get mostly average kidults in 2020 etc. Which means an average country.

There you go, hows that for an answer?

Freddy says:

06:09am | 30/07/10

I agree, alot of parents love their kids no matter what, but parenthood has never guaranteed selflessness in every parent, or there wouldn’t be serious issues of child abuse in the world today.

Also parental love is clearly challenged by stronger cultural issues: its not just fashion.
Most women love their children, although there are mutants who don’t, but if having a baby of the wrong gender results in reduction in status for the mother (extended families, bullying, food rations etc), then why is she forced to bring the worthless to life?

You might say she should be forced to because otherwise there could result in a gender imbalance in the broader culture, but I don’t believe that is for us to judge.

We are told by our leaders everyday that every culture is equally valid, so why should we impose our cultural values (all kids should be lived) on others.  Why should we make a womans life unbearable because the wrong sperm fertilized her egg.

Charles Darwin says:

01:44pm | 30/07/10

Yeah I think messing with natural selection is a great idea. I want my child to have flippers and wings.

TLM says:

02:53pm | 30/07/10

@Darwin - I think gills would be pretty cool also, no need to worry about them drowning in the pool or ocean

Don says:

08:53am | 29/07/10

Thank the excess house prices created by tax free subsidies and policies for your boomer mates pal and you get an idea why kids are in care. Employers also demand long hours job security is a myth so tell me children are meant to be raised without money on good intentions and airy fairy sentiments alone. As for the above comment of children being a lifestyle choice. To a point they are. Forcing people who are psychologically, mentally, emotionally and financially unable or unwilling to have children into parenthood simply creates disastorous results for families and socities. Of course idiots who pander this breed at all cost mentality, pro life no abortion nonsense don’t actually have to pay the price when it goes wrong do they?

Stephanie says:

11:24am | 29/07/10

Sadly true, and the costs of living are making a one income household an idealistic lifestyle, but unrealistic. I’m a stay-at-home mum and my husband is the sole breadwinner - and regardless of what people say (“Gee, but he earns more than I do!”), one income is barely enough to support a house, cars, food, bills, and what our children need in expenses. I wish it were otherwise… It’s a pity that the elective governments aren’t offering something to help one income households.

TLM says:

09:38am | 29/07/10

You must be doing it wrong, there is nothing difficult about being a parent, you are placing too much importance on yourself and any shortcomings, you have 24 hours in a day, if you can’t do everything within that time then you need time management training.

I am sick of parents, male and female, saying that ‘being a parent is the hardest job you will ever do’ bull, parenting is easy. I didn’t even read the rest of your rant that’s how bored I was

Shane From Melbourne says:

10:45am | 29/07/10

Fascinated by your end statement- “Healthy, safe and educated children is a community responsibility. Everything else belongs to the family so back off.” So the costs of raising the children are to be borne by the community but all other rights are private? The is so wrong on so many levels- both logically and morally. That, my friend, is what is known as trying to have it both ways and get a free lunch at the same time…..

Nick says:

10:47am | 29/07/10

TLM - sorry, but what planet do you live on?  Let me in because i’d love to try some of what you’re smoking over there!  Sounds wonderful.  Yes, it’s not hard.  Not hard at all.  Ha ha ha.  It’s all us parents failing to get everything done in 24 hours which are to blame.  It’s easy!  Just get it all done.  Simple!  Why didn’t I think of that?  I bet you are the best parent, ever.  Have you won any awards for your amazing parenting skills?  Tell me all about it cause you’re not boring at all.

Brian says:

11:16am | 29/07/10

Nothing difficult about being a parent? My baby boy is only three months old and I already know you’re wrong. So far it hasn’t been ‘the hardest thing I’ll ever do’ (yet), and I’ve enjoyed every minute, but calling it easy would be a lie.

The problem comes with the assumption that time management training would be helpful. You see, all of the time management courses I’ve been on (thus far about four) assume that there are ‘x’ number of things to do within ‘y’ time, with a small stochastic element. Unfortunately, the reality of a child is that there is a huge random element, far beyond what the courses allow - I’ve spent anywhere between 2 hours and 15 hours a day holding him, depending on how needy and/or stressed he is that day (no, the 15 is not an exageration. My wife was exhausted so I let her sleep - I had him constantly in my arms from 3 in the afternoon until 5 the next morning, barring hygiene necessities for me and him, and he was happy and comfortable when being held but unhappy when put down. Interestingly, I enjoyed the experience, unproductive as it was). 15 hours, plus 6 of sleep leaves three - not much you can do there. Other days I can do plenty, because he keeps himself occupied looking at things only he can see.

For that matter, time is not the only indication of difficulty. Multi-vector calculus can be solved very quickly, but is difficult. Winning an Olympic race takes very little time, but is difficult. Choosing the correct investment takes only the click of a button, but is difficult.

As for sex selection - I wanted a girl the first time, but love my son utterly and without conditions. I’d like a girl for the next one - but will love a second son utterly and without conditions as well. If we were in the situation where we needed IVF already, I would have no hesitation in choosing the sex of the child, although I wouldn’t go to IVF specifically for it - but I WILL be doing anything short of direct medical intervention possible to get a girl (timing etc).

Why? Because I want a daughter. Selfish? Maybe, but the thing is I will love that daughter (or son, should it turn out that way) regardless of whether I ‘chose’ them or not.

TLM says:

11:22am | 29/07/10

@Nick - I have no idea why parents insist on saying they have it so tough! I am a single parent of twins, I live only with my kids and I work full time from home and still manage to keep the house clean, cook healthy meals from scratch and am the ruler of my abode and take my kids on holidays. really where is the hard? My kids are happy and healthy, there are no awards for parenting, my kids smiling faces is enough for me, but maybe you need validation

apparent says:

11:40am | 29/07/10

Healthy safe and educated children is a parent’s responsibility - not the daycare, not the school, not the community. The community may have to pick up the slack because of parents’ lack of commitment to the child.

Contraception, abortion, IVF, ultrasound (to determine if your child is up to scratch) do not lead to healthy children - but to abandoned children. All of these technologies have become common due to our culture of impulse, desire and control - we just can’t leave it to nature.

The idea that the system would need to be regulated and controlled only points to the fact that gender selection can and would be abused due to the same selfish tendencies.

Nick says:

12:02pm | 29/07/10

TLM - ok, that is good and well done, honestly.  I have twins too and another one on top of that, all under 5.  I think that perhaps what you may be saying is that it is indeed hard, but that we shouldn’t focus on that.  You don’t and that makes it easier for you.  There is truth to that statement.  And, in fact, I think this is why the author is correct in saying that pre-determination of sex is ‘not healthy’ because it shifts our focus to seeing kids as a way of pleasuring ourselves, rather than the truth: it is hard, self-less work and if you go into it with the wrong attitude you are less likely to get through it unscathed.  Kind of like marriage, really!  (kidding).

Mistress D says:

12:19pm | 29/07/10

“Healthy, safe and educated children is a community responsibility”

So what’s left for you to do?

TLM says:

12:24pm | 29/07/10

@Apparent - Contraception is needed to stop mass population growth, we are not brood mares and you can kill yourself by having child after child, year after year, you have so many hormones rushing through your body. and what’s wrong with waiting until you are older, more mature and financially able to give your kids a good life as opposed to having a kid when you are 14, 15, 16, 17 etc and your house is bursting at the seems and you can’t afford to do anything for yourself.

Your life doesn’t end just because you have kids, you do not have to sacrifice your own happiness or wants just coz you have kids, I go on an overseas holiday once a year a big one for about a month and guess what? I take the kids with me, lots of fun for the other plane passengers but who cares about them? I go to the movies with friends when there is something good out, I go out to the club maybe once a month to catch up with friends, that’s why god invented grandmothers

TLM says:

01:01pm | 29/07/10

@Nick - yes that’s exactly what I am saying, I am not saying it’s not hard but don’t focus only on that, my boys are a treat, even when they are being naughty it’s still cute or when they want cuddles, usually it’s one or the other who wants cuddle time all day so that leaves me able to still work, sometimes it’s both of them that want to snuggle with mummy but luckily that only happens on the weekend in bad weather and we all snuggle on mummy’s chair with our favourite books and I read to them or they sit there and pretend to read or we just sit and stare out the window.

I am a big believer in what you put out there you in fact create, only expect bad things only bad things will happen. Due to that I do not see my kids as a chore or a trial, yes sometimes I want to pull my hair out like when I have to explain to day care staff no they don’t need a time out if they are fighting with each other, I don’t mind that it is building their relationship, or when they thought it was a good idea to get into mummy’s nail polish (which I could have sworn was high enough to be out of reach) and paint a mural on their bedroom wall, I don’t shout at them, I shook my head and crouched down to their level and asked if it was really necessary to use mummy’s nail polish to which I get these angelic grins and arms wrapped around my neck for hugs and kisses and all is right in my world, i still have to clean it off the wall but I am smiling while doing this.

ren says:

01:23pm | 29/07/10

TLM - I congratulate you on being such a wonderful human being. The fact that you find it all so easy is great for you, well done. I find it hard. I freely admit it .I know that I’m a wonderful mother though. I don’t think I’m doing anyone any favours by pretending that I have all the answers. That arrogance just doesn’t feel right to me. No wonder there is such a high rate of postnatal depression. I do everything that you proudly proclaim to do.. I work, I have two kids (one with special needs), I cook healthy meals, I keep the house reasonably tidy.  I also have 24 hours in the day, I choose to sleep and play during some of them. And yet because I say that I find it hard (I never suggested that everyone does) I’m somehow in need of professional help?

Shane - I’m not suggesting the community is responsible for bearing all costs of raising children. I am saying that community has a responsibility to act as a safety net to jump in ONLY when children are at risk. Beyond that, people should be free to raise their children and their families as they wish.

TLM says:

05:05pm | 29/07/10

@Ren - I know I am an inspiration aren’t I? not many people can be like me or as wonderful as I am, it takes hard work and patience and years of practise to be me.

ren says:

07:48pm | 29/07/10

@TLM you say “...if I had one with special needs as well I am pretty sure I would be in the corner rocking back and forth, I would not be able to cope with it so just back off”

Why is there one rule for you and another for everyone else? Or do you not care , as long as you come out feeling morally superior?

So, you are saying that for you motherhood is never difficult because you have perfect children, but that if you didn’t you couldn’t cope? But you are nonetheless sick and tired of hearing about annoying people like me who say that having kids is hard work.

TLM says:

09:30am | 30/07/10

@Ren - I am not saying my kids are perfect, they are children, the very young do not always do what they are told, I see this all the time in my kids but I don’t let it bother me coz they are still learning what will bring about mummy’s cranky face and sometimes they just love to push to bring it about, they find it endlessly entertaining. What I am sick of is stay at home parents making out they have the most difficult job in the world and they should be worshipped.

I freely admit that I wouldn’t be able to cope with a child with down syndrome, I do not have that kind of patience or fortitude, what’s wrong with that? a lot of people can’t or we wouldn’t have mothers suing the doctors for not catching the down syndrome and giving them the choice to abort, I am not the only one to admit it and it’s not a crime . I know my strengths and my faults

I am not saying one rule for me and one for everyone else, where did I mention that? I do not find motherhood difficult because I do not have expectations set in stone, I can adapt to what my kids throw at me, other people may look at my boys at home trying to bash each others brains out and find them a handful, but they are boys and they will fight with each other, even at day care but woe betide anyone who picks on one of them as they have to deal with both, they protect each other and I want them to grow up that way watching each others backs.

I live by a philosophy and am teaching my boys a code of conduct, now these may not fly with others but they work for us.

Mother in the true sense of the word... says:

11:47am | 30/07/10

@ TLM ...please, please, please, can I have your boys in my class? They will be the easiest of the lot to teach. They will think of others, have respect for property and strive to achieve.

Too many “parents” have a child because it is the only thing they can’t buy at a boutique. It really has become the latest status symbol - the very cutest “must have”. Therefore, it must be the perfect one. These self-centred shopaholics cannot possibly teach a child to care for others when they can’t lead by example.

linda says:

04:25pm | 30/07/10

@TLM, hey you don’t make much sense do you? you say you’re just trying to be funny below. that’s just because everyone realise how full of it you are. you probably just need a hobby. hint to you: telling other parents that they are not doing a good job because they find things tough is not funny. it’s stupid. if you find it so easy, you’re probably just not trying hard enough! spending too much time criticising other parents it seems and not enough time honing your own skills as a decent human being. you are obviously not teaching your children about empathy and honesty. it’s not hard to love your children, it’s just physically and mentally hard to get thorugh everything in the day. if you don’t question and reflect on your parenting skills then clearly something is defective.

NEFFA says:

11:42am | 29/07/10

The problem is it puts unrealistic expectations on an unborn child. These parents obviously have a dream they wish to fulfill, what happens when those dreams aren’t realised?

Ricardo says:

01:28pm | 29/07/10

So, you’re back!

Your argument about love (or lack thereof) is just a straw man. go and read the article again. The issue is way more complex. It stems from a culture in which MOST (so not to generalize) of those who would be practicing this (sex selection) are those who have kids not because they are called to have kids and have a family, but because “Now it’s time” (after I’ve achieved my brand new 4WD, a house, travelled around the world) as opposed to “not now”, times before achieving those material things and having tried several sexual partners to see which suits the best, times tinted with avoidance or rejection of pregnancies because ‘it’s not convenient right now’. But now, that I have all that I need, what else can I get? Well, let’s try a kid. Is it too late? No, we’ve fixed it with IVF. One more? No, one is enough to fulfill the trendiness, to achieve those things I wanted to do before I die. Now, I can pick the sex - then the colour of the eyes, skin… Suddenly, the kid has become something to wear. See how we can take it to the other extreme? Well it might as well be where we’re going. If you think it’s exaggerated, go read Brave New World - written more than half a century ago. It might have sounded ridiculous at the time, but many things are actually happening now (e.g., “Better ending than mending”).

Those parents who are to love their kids so dearly as you state, are those who will love their child for who it is, not for what it is. They don’t need to pick what they will love.

iansand says:

03:16pm | 29/07/10

Ricardo - See my earlier comment about having a direct line to people’s motivations.  You could also try to elucidate why selection of sex has anything to do with an “its time” argument.  IVF perhaps, but not selection of sex.

Michael says:

11:02am | 29/07/10

100% agree

Ricardo says:

01:38pm | 29/07/10

TLM, let’s do an exercise:

Pick one of your boys, just one.

God forbid - If he were to have an accident and left with some level of intellectual disability, would you:

A) Dismember him, put the parts in the blender and then flush him down the toilet?
B) Continue loving him for the rest of his life for being your son?

Here it seems choice (a) is what you said you would pick. You’d just do it earlier in his life, but the same thing in the end.

KH says:

01:51pm | 29/07/10

TLM - I agree with you.  If I had the choice, I would exercise it. 
As for Ricardo - you deal with crap if it happens.

TLM says:

01:52pm | 29/07/10

Ricardo - None of us really know what we will do in any given situation, with my boys I have known and loved them for over 3 years, while still in the womb I have not known them personally, I have not seen their smiles or smelled their hair so it’s a lot easier, if one of them god forbid gets into an accident which I don’t even want to think about then I will deal with it as it comes along, i don’t know what I would do, I do know that putting a live toddler in a blender is illegal so really wont be doing that option, I still stand by what I said above, if I got pregnant again I would still abort if there was something wrong

AL says:

02:23pm | 29/07/10

Ouch, ricardo.  Until you’re a woman you won’t really understand the choice that has to be made when choosing to abort or not.

I once thought it would be a clear cut decision that if my child had downs syndrome I’d abort.  That was, until the 12 week scan when I saw the baby on the screen where they were doing the measurements for the risk factor, and all I could think of was “Please let there be nothing wrong with it because I don’t know if I could abort after seeing that image on the screen, even WITH a positive downs syndrome test”

Ricardo says:

02:57pm | 29/07/10

Yes, and with those smiles and smell of hair also come the tantrums and smell of dirty nappies - and we still love them as much if not more.

That one you would get rid of, would be your baby just as much as those lovely two you have. And would love you just as much as them two love you.

TLM says:

03:12pm | 29/07/10

@Ricardo, I will still exercise my right to abort if I wont be able to handle it, I am just lucky my 2 are pretty well behaved as I am a single parent, if I had one with special needs as well I am pretty sure I would be in the corner rocking back and forth, I would not be able to cope with it so just back off it’s not like it’s your kid and there is nothing wrong with the babies i do have and thankfully never had to decide

Ricardo says:

03:17pm | 29/07/10

Well said AL… and on top of that, the fact that tests for Down’s syndrome are not very good when it comes to specificity and sensitivity - imagine how many healthy little ones killed ‘in the name of Down’, let alone those disposed of just because ‘now it’s not the time’. Abortion, at any stage, should be penalized.

TLM says:

03:51pm | 29/07/10

@Ricardo, well unfortunately until it becomes illegal to do so when there is no danger to the mother you will just have to deal with people’s choices, or hang around abortion centres with stupid pickets making the poor woman feel really bad, instead of around the abortion clinics you should be preventing it in the first place, hang around bottle shops and clubs/bars that would be more helpful

NBQLD says:

04:11pm | 29/07/10

As the parent of a child who has Down Syndrome, I find this debate most illuminating. TLM, you’re a prime example of the selfishness the opinion piece seeks to highlight. Children with Down Syndrome (please note they are not Down Syndrome, but children) can be more work than other childre, so can children with ADHD, or autism, or a range of behavioural problems. Where do you do draw the line and why?

AL says:

04:33pm | 29/07/10

@Ricardo yes, there are instances where people have chosen to abort based on a “positive” downs test to find that the baby was perfectly fine.  I don’t think I could handle that.
However, I am also pro choice and it is up to a woman to decide what she wants to do with regards to abortion.
In my own personal situation regarding the abortion debate, I thought that it would be a lot more black and white than what it was, and when faced with making that decision I found myself going against what I thought I would do, and proceeding with the pregnancy.

You can theorize all you want about what you would do, but you never truly know until you’re actually faced with that decision.

TLM says:

04:36pm | 29/07/10

First off I don’t believe in ADHD mainly coz I would have been diagnosed with it in school and all it means is I am bored and too many kids are on the autism spectrum for me to have much faith they are in fact autistic, I speak from experience, a friend was told to get into a school her son needed to be diagnosed on the autism spectrum so she went to doctor after doctor just to get someone to agree to that, nothing wrong with the kid at all.

I am speaking as a single parent here, I don’t have a partner to pick up the slack or financial responsibility it’s just me. So I am sorry if you are offended but I can’t afford to fiscally or emotionally deal with a child with special needs, it’s bad enough my kids are genetically bound to get asthma from me so I know how to deal with that but really anything else? nope can’t handle it.

I applaud you for having the stones to do it, but I gotta tell ya, if I had a single pregnancy and didn’t find out the child had Down Syndrome until it was born, it would be put up for adoption real quick

AL says:

04:50pm | 29/07/10

@TLM as someone who suffers from ADHD and who’s child most likely will inherit it, the fact that you say you don’t “believe” in it makes me want to disregard anything further you have to say.  I’m SICK of people discounting it as laziness or boredom when they have no idea what its like to live with it.

ADHD does NOT simply mean someone is bored.  Having had it all my life and only being diagnosed when approaching 30 (which has allowed a complete turnaround in my life in how I view my ability to do things) has been a big relief, but what’s more has allowed me to be on the lookout for my child and *IF* he exhibits the symtoms being able to catch it nice and early and treat it with drug-free alternatives.  Having ADHD means being a single parent is going to be a HUGE task for me personally, and if my child has it I’m sure that will come with its own share of challenges, but I still am looking forward to everything that being a loving parent to that child will entail - the good AND the bad.

Ricardo says:

07:19pm | 29/07/10

@TLM - I think I read from you earlier:

“You must be doing it wrong, there is nothing difficult about being a parent, you are placing too much importance on yourself and any shortcomings, you have 24 hours in a day, if you can’t do everything within that time then you need time management training.

I am sick of parents, male and female, saying that ‘being a parent is the hardest job you will ever do’ bull, parenting is easy.”

This, contrasted to your last post from this thread, makes me realize how much I should disregard any of your further posts. If you sum up the content of your different posts here, the result is: empty rhetoric.

ren says:

08:09pm | 29/07/10

@TLM also tells us that she is sick of hearing people talk about hard parenting is, but then goes to great pains to tell us how wonderful she is as a single parent doing this and that and not getting the pension blah blah blah. I have no doubt that she is a great mum. Her boys are probably wonderful little people. Hopefully they will grow up with a little more compassion for the rest of the people they share this world with and a respect for the fact that we are all entitled to do things our way, and as long as no-one gets hurt then that’s perfectly ok. Motherhood can be a vulnerable and isolating time (maybe not for @TLM who seems to live on Planet Pollyanna), and no-one needs to be told (especially by someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about) that they are not doing a good job. Mothers need support and compassion, not judgement and arrogance.

TLM says:

09:34am | 30/07/10

Ren and Ricardo, read my posts again tounge in cheek, if you can’t that you are being played with for entertainment purposes then there’s really no hope for you

Ren says:

09:06pm | 30/07/10

@TLM you weren’t being tongue in cheek, nice try though… you were being judgmental to validate yourself and then got caught out for being hypocritical. Unfortunately there are plenty who think its clever to criticise others for no good reason and thats what i am tired of. You just illustrated the point I was making about how uninteresting the arrogant are. I wish you well though.

Kate says:

09:46pm | 30/07/10

TLM, I too would abort a foetus if it was found to have Down Syndrome.

Arguments like ‘well imagine one of your kids and then imagine them disabled, would you murder them?’ are ridiculous. Aborting a foetus that is only a few months old is COMPLETELY different to facing a similar situation with a human being that you have nurtured and grown to love.
Children with disabilities require a special level of care, attention and financial support that some parents just can’t provide, whether it’s because they don’t have the money or have too many other children to worry about or whatever the case may be. I think aborting a foetus that is found to have a serious problem is far preferable to raising a special needs child in an environment which will not be financially or emotionally sufficient for the child’s wellbeing.

Blue says:

12:37pm | 29/07/10

If that is the case, why then should you not be able to have a say in who and wat you are responsible for?

For the record, I’m perfectly happy with what I have thanks.

KH says:

10:46am | 29/07/10

Wow - i didn’t think there was anyone worse than Eric, but here you are.

Ray says:

11:39am | 29/07/10

KH, If the cap fits, you must wear it. Its just that women have had such and unprecedented run as a protected species that they are regailed and unable to accept any counter point of view. Like for example the MY BODY I’ll do what I want with it.

Reproduction is a three way joint venture and the product (the child) should hold prominence. But no our women (not all though) stand on the ‘me’ and ‘mine’ mentality with no one having the fortitude to challenge it.

Well I do (challenge it) KH. Like it or loathe it, but at least I don’t have the feminist betterness. Matter of fact I feel that inevitable romance coming on. We should meet to discuss matters of the heart.

Sorry about my typos in last para of original blog but we could use that as a basis for meeting and reprogamming my miscreant thoughts.

Dan says:

11:54am | 29/07/10

KH, I don’t know if he’s worse than Eric, but he certainly gives Eric a run for his money.

Bitten says:

11:03am | 29/07/10

I have such a crush on you right now. This and the commentary on the paedophile vigilantes are officially my favourites. I’m going to start a Zeta fan club. With t-shirts.

TLM says:

11:26am | 29/07/10

I am with you, and I get really annoyed by parents who feel they have the right to everything merely because they did what millions of others do all time and pop out a kid, it is not that big a deal, it is not a miracle it is a basic function, the miracle would be if I could of got their father to deliver them, that would have been nice.

It is not the miracle of life, it is not the toughest job on the planet, get over yourselves

Shane From Melbourne says:

12:28pm | 29/07/10

You can’t diss the AFA and expect to get away with it. I expect the christian commandos to come bursting through your door any minute now….

Zeta says:

01:38pm | 29/07/10

@ Shane from Melbourne - Dude, I wasn’t dissing the AFA. When I diss the AFA, I’m not funny about it, because they’re not a funny organisation, and their hypocrisy isn’t the funny kind, like the Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly kind - it’s the insidious, hateful kind of hypocrisy that poisons society and corrupts the very souls they claim to protect.

Look, you take a seemingly humourless topic like newborn babies and it’s still, in the right context, rife with humour. But I challenge you to find anything funny about an organisation suckling at the toxic teet of media conglomerates and both major political parties and using their ill gotten gains to publish ‘research’ that encourages child abuse, corporal punishment and misogyny.

I’m an avowed advocate of free speech, but if you want free speech, you have to be honest about what your free speech is. I might hate Stephanie Myer with a passion, but that passion is muted by the fact she doesn’t go to book signings, hold up a copy of Breaking Dawn and say ‘this is an honest and true depiction of my relationship with an actual sparkling vampire, this actually happened.’

You take the most heinous op-ed author in this country, which ever one you think it is, from what ever side and they’re not standing by their work saying ‘this is objective truth that I have researched thouroughly to an academic standard, and by some quantifiable measurement - asylum seekers are in fact evil.’

Everything is about opinion. We see the world through a lens of opinion. Universities are held to such a high standard because genuine academic inquiry must cut through the cloud of opinion and debate facts.

It riles me so bad, like, Tumblr using hipster all caps bad, to see these people passing themselves off as ‘researchers’ issuing ‘research’ that is little more than Evangelical tub thumbing coached in the language of serious thought. 

What pisses me off most, is that I agree with this cretin. You shouldn’t choose the sex of your child. I even believe in the same God as these foul headed imbeciles and that annoys me even more.

This is why Jesus turned over tables in the Temple. These people might talk a good game and and pray the right prayers, but it’s like they’re reading a completely different book. Christianity was about revolution. Jesus Christ was not a conservative. He was angry. He wanted to open people’s eyes to the corruption of the Pharisees and give them freedom from tyranny and he let himself get nailed to a cross in aid of that cause.

And I see red when these people, dressing themselves in Christ’s clothes, build the same bureaucracies he sought to tear down, spew the same dogma Christ tried to challenge, and tell the world what to think. Christiantiy isn’t about the ‘family’. That’s a perversion of what Christ taught. Christiantiy was about acceptance, about forgivness, irrespective of the crime, and about being given the ultimate freedom to live your life free of expectation because no matter what you do, God will love you anyway. Even if the Australian Family Association don’t.

Dan says:

09:28am | 30/07/10

I so agree with you Zeta. It angers me that simply because an organisation calls themselves something, they thinkk they are representative of it or are experts in it. The AFA does not represent my family at all.

IMHO says:

04:57pm | 29/07/10

Nicely written Stephanie

Bitten says:

11:30am | 29/07/10

Mmmm - Never Let Me Go territory.

TLM says:

11:34am | 29/07/10

You will find that some parents will do this anyway, parents with a child who has cancer will often breed a sibling to donate blood and bone marrow for the sick child, there have been cases and even a movie made about it so not that big a leap

Stephanie says:

11:36am | 29/07/10

That’s horrible, but true…

iansand says:

11:59am | 29/07/10

Gosh

Gavin says:

12:04pm | 29/07/10

Then we could look at inter-species breeding. We may one day have a real Bugs Bunny, or Humphrey B. Bear. Or that guy who thinks he’s a lizard.

Francis says:

12:08pm | 29/07/10

@ TLM,

you have to be joking? surely not.

If thats true it might be closer than I thought.

TLM says:

01:06pm | 29/07/10

@Francis - unfortunately not, when 1 child is dying a sibling is a closer match for organs, blood or bone marrow, there was that cameron diaz movie about it, it does happen, they breed a child to save the other, sad but true

Kordez says:

01:09pm | 29/07/10

I gather you’d be opting for female offspring?

Jeremy says:

01:13pm | 30/07/10

yeah you’re right. men have nothing to do with conceiving, and subsequently raising children. who does he think he is?

Bomber says:

12:49pm | 29/07/10

I find it disturbing how so many women who find it so easy to have children, feel the need to tell those with health fertility issues that they should just accept childlessness. Should someone’s early onset menopause or cancer be a reason to justify denying them a family?

I rather think not.

There are NOT “plenty” of children in adoption agencies in this country, or in any other country and the processes are designed to dissuade most people from following this path. It is also hideously expensive, and is fully user paid - unlike your boths, which would have been subsidised by the government via Medicare.

Your post is ugly.

TLM says:

12:19pm | 29/07/10

There is a big difference to home remedies and old wives tales to get a certain sex and genetically messing with DNA using science to play god.

TLM says:

01:11pm | 29/07/10

we all turn gay/lesbian and grow children in artificial wombs but only those of the same sex, didn’t need sperm to do just cloning technology which we have now.

I saw a movie once, B-grade, where there was a virus that was targeted to a specific people but mutated and started attacking the Y chromosone and the women were cool with that as they deemed men to be the problem in the world as they were the most violent, it was pretty freaky and yes all the women were lesbians

Kordez says:

01:13pm | 29/07/10

I wonder whether there would be opposed views to gay marriage, same sex adoption and cloning?

Steve says:

01:14pm | 29/07/10

Not likely to be a problem…..even if a million people could afford to do it. It would only affect 0.02% of the worlds population.  Over half the worlds population live on less than $2.50 a day.  This is a debate only the most privileged in the world would even think about.

Simple says:

01:16pm | 29/07/10

Someone mentioned that nature has always had a way of keeping a balance - that would always continue.  Some people would want boys, some would want girls. It may fluctuate slightly as it always has through wars, natrual disasters, etc. But it would balance itself out

TLM says:

01:17pm | 29/07/10

Ultrasound is also very good at keeping your children alive so don’t bag it out like that, it makes sure that the baby is not under weight and can spot problems so you have a healthy baby. And day care is most time from 9-3 just like school so you can still parent

KH says:

01:58pm | 29/07/10

Sure. Lets wind back the clock, so that 1 in 3 women can die in childbirth. How about we stop trying to cure cancer while we’re at it.  and antibiotics - we don’t need them any more, or any other drugs.  Oh yeah, forget about life support.  We wouldn’t want that to get in the way of ‘natural’ processes…...................

A Parent Lee says:

02:33pm | 29/07/10

i’m not saying these things are good/bad or shouldn’t exist - just that the majority of people choose to use them in a selfish and self serving way.

KH - i am pretty sure that choosing the baby’s gender does not have any influence on mother’s dying during childbirth. As far a cancer, antibiotics and life support go - i am not sure of the connection to the idea of gender selection being selfish.

HappyCynic says:

03:56pm | 29/07/10

@A Parent Lee

So what.  It’s their life, they’re free to experience it exactly how they want to and will continue to do so whether you or some nutty association who claims to represent Australian families like it or not.

If a person wants to use contraception, abortion, IVF, formula or whatever in a selfish/self serving way then that’s their choice, their business and the consequences of their actions are theirs to live with.  Anyone who disagrees with that person’s choices in life can quietly go f**k themselves.

As long as I am not doing any quantifiable or provable harm to anyone, including myself, then why should my choices matter to other people?

A Parent Lee says:

05:22pm | 29/07/10

i totally agree with happy cynic. We are all free to do exactly what we want - I am merely saying that contraception, abortion etc are selfish behaviours. I don’t personally have a problem with any of it.

I also agree with the point that as long as no one is harmed by the choice of, say, having an abortion because of the wrong gender, then the rest of society needs to respect that.

Shane From Melbourne says:

03:35pm | 29/07/10

Well, generally a “boy” has an XY sex chromosome and a “girl” has an XX sex chromosome. There are some rare exceptions to this rule, but it is a good a definition as any…..

TLM says:

03:53pm | 29/07/10

Boys have blue booties, girls have pink

progressivesunite says:

01:17pm | 29/07/10

no, it’s not a trick question….parents with a clear preference for one over the other obviously think there are certain innate characteristics inherent to each gender and will probably be very upset if their son likes dolls or their daughter likes trucks….I’m trying to say that it’s a bit 1950s to define people by their gender alone….

AdamC says:

01:39pm | 29/07/10

Geez, the 1950s get a bad rap from you folks, don’t they? I see there’s no ‘progressive’ aversion to discriminating against decades then, is there?

Newsplash PU, parents always have expectations about their kids, and these expectations are often decadally incorrect. For example, I imagine even the parents of the spinning spinster (that’s Julia Gillard, btw) would, in their heart of hearts, have liked her to pop out a grandkid or two. And, not that I know for sure but, given the decade thing again, it is safe to assume that Gillrudd’s folks didn’t use IVF techniques to ensure they got themselves a ‘girl’.

So, you see, PU, even without the benefit of IVF sex selection, many parents are still wedded to outmoded concepts like gender. It’s a pity too; I’m sure I would have preferred truck driver barbie to an actual Tonka Truck.

jeremy says:

01:32pm | 30/07/10

progressivesunite - it is a bit prehistoric to define “people” as people too. embrace the change.

if you genuinely think that gender is not something defines a person, you are living in delusion

jeremy says:

01:33pm | 30/07/10

progressivesunite - it is a bit prehistoric to define “people” as people too. embrace the change.

if you genuinely think that gender is not something defines a person, you are living in delusion

ren says:

02:28pm | 29/07/10

100% agree!!

TLM says:

02:01pm | 29/07/10

Sarah do you know how hard it is to actually adopt? you should read some of these blogs and others by people who have been trying to adopt for over 10 years and costing upwards from 30K, it is not easy and the Aussie government makes it harder for us to adopt, it is not the be all end all option but people keep going to that. There may be plenty of kids but with the laws and red tape we have to jump through they will be adults by the time we get approval

Kordez says:

02:07pm | 29/07/10

You’d consider me almost a murderer if I chose to have a son instead of a daughter… STP, thats just crazy talk!
How about if I chpse my child to be free from the risk of terminal illness? What does that make me then?
No doubt in the future these will be real choices parents will make, and in my opinion it will be those who don’t pay for a gene scan and prevention who are labeled as bad as a murderer especially if they decide to raise a terminally ill child when it could have been prevented.

Simple says:

02:50pm | 29/07/10

Using your logic, STP, those who chose not to have a child at all that would also be murderers. I’m not sure you understand how the process works.

TLM says:

03:55pm | 29/07/10

I don’t know Simple how can those who chose not to have them or who medically can’t and are not bothering with IVF how can that be murder when there is no life lost? unless you are talking about when we get our periods is that what you are connecting with murder? I know you don’t believe it but am trying to connect it together

ren says:

03:09pm | 29/07/10

100% agree!!!

WhatIsLove? says:

03:15pm | 29/07/10

Except that love isn’t just emotional. The very fact of making effort and sacrifices when raising a child is an expression of love. It’s not a feeling - it’s regardless of feeling. When a parent puts their child’s interests first even if they don’t FEEL like it (like the dad in the article) they are showing by their actions that they love the child.

In most cases, loving a child means raising them and then letting them go out into the world once they are adults, which can be very hard for parents to do. In other cases, it means continuing to care for a child who will never be able to care for him/herself.

Either way will require a sacrifice from the parent in the interests of the child. But kids in both situations are worthy of the sacrifice. Both kinds of sacrifice are an expression of love. Whether raising a disabled child, or raising a completely healthy child, parenting demands sacrifice.

Families with disabled kids do a heroic job and they deserve as much support from the community as possible. But just because raising disabled kids is more stressful, doesn’t mean they don’t deserve to live. Otherwise we could also say that kids with cancer don’t deserve to live, because their illness puts their parents under so much stress.

Jayne M says:

03:23pm | 29/07/10

Yes, no one would argue that the parents who raise disabled children are not incredible. But people should be given the choice. I am not anti abortion . . . to be the BEST parent you can be it does have to be about you to a certain degree. If you are not ready for a child and genuinely DON’T want to raise or birth one but a mistake was made, then you should not have to feel like your child is a penalty.

I think you’ll find that also many disabled children don’t have what anybody would call a quality of life.

At the end of the day a parent can choose if they want to have a baby and under what circumstances they want to have it.

WhatIsLove? says:

04:18pm | 29/07/10

“If you are not ready for a child and genuinely DON’T want to raise or birth one but a mistake was made, then you should not have to feel like your child is a penalty.”

This is exactly the point. The child IS NEVER a penalty. The child is a human being worthy of love. This is so, even if the parents made a mistake, and even if they FEEL like the child is a penalty. Parenting is about loving EVEN WHEN YOU DON’T WANT TO, because when you create another human life, that human has the right to be loved.

“I think you’ll find that also many disabled children don’t have what anybody would call a quality of life.”

This is such a dangerous line of argument. From OUR perspective, disabled children don’t have quality of life, but who is to say that their lives don’t have meaning? We know very little about the experience of disabled children, and we can’t just assume that their lives are not worth living.

Also, starving children and sick children don’t have quality of life. That doesn’t give us a right to get rid of them, and pretend they were never there. They are just as deserving of love and care, even if this places us under more pressure and stress. WE created THEM; THEY didn’t choose to be born. This means WE have to take responsibility, and not just put them in the “too hard” basket.

Not every parent can cope with a disabled child, and there is no shame in that at all. Everyone has limits. But that’s where extended family needs to step in. Also there are community support options, and even adoption if necessary, to ensure that the child gets the care and love it needs.

With all of these options available, it’s just not good enough to say that parental stress, or mistakes by adults are a good enough reason to get rid of disabled kids. In fact, it is a horrible judgment on the thousands disabled Australians who are living perfectly happy lives.

Simple says:

03:38pm | 29/07/10

What if, without the intervention of science, something happened (lets say it was caused by a sunami that unlocked some airborne substance) and only girls (or boys) would be conceived from that day on.  Would you want science to help with ability to have boys (or girls)?

It is about as probable as everyone wanting to have babies of the same sex.

iansand says:

07:17pm | 29/07/10

Half and half to breed?  Nonsense.  I reckon 1 bloke to 100 blokesses is doable.

TLM says:

04:19pm | 29/07/10

@John - I dont’ know about anyone else but as I am (not sure where the obedient fits in or righteous) an independant (more important), law abiding citizen and I plan on raising my kids the same way, it doesn’t need to be said it’s a given for me, I am not going to raise my kids to throw stones at cars, to set fire to letter boxes, they will be raised to stand for invalid or elderly people on public transport, they already have manners and know that they don’t get anything without using them, they are being raised to be perfect little gentlemen. But like I said, not sure about anyone else but I really think your comment was not needed as it’s usually a given it will happen

TLM says:

12:50pm | 30/07/10

Not really, we are just bringing back the practices used in Ancient Sparta to a lessor degree

TLM says:

02:56pm | 30/07/10

What is the process as I am picturing DNA manipulation much like Jurassic Park and no good can come of that

Kordez says:

03:46pm | 30/07/10

@TLM, Newman was eaten… That was something good.. =P

TLM says:

05:29pm | 30/07/10

@Kordez - true I forgot about that, but DNA manipulation still sounds weird science to me, and those poor dinosaurs being discriminated against for something they can’t help

zoe says:

10:03am | 31/07/10

Josie I’m just wondering though where you would draw the line.  Gender selection OK? Now suppose in a few years you’ll be able to choose eye colour hair colour, height etc.  What if somebody has a burning desire to have a blond, blue eyed baby girl with ringlets is that OK?

I have a girl and two boys.  I never wanted girls surprisingly but I was blessed with a beautiful baby girl and the first thing I thought when she was born was why did I want a boy?  If gender selection was easy and readily available and socially accepted would I have gone with it so I wouldn’t have had a girl? Possibly, I did feel rather strongly about not wanting girls, but then I would have missed out on the beautiful daughter I have.  Sometimes what you think you want is not what you need or does not work out how you think it will.  For me a huge part of the magic of having a baby was the wondering and the anticipation of meeting this little person with no preconceptions, if you have ‘engineered’ them to meet the criteria you specify then that magic is lost.

Annie says:

10:28am | 02/08/10

i have had a think thank you very much Pat.
this kid blogs about his view on sex selection, yet he probably won’t even know what its like for a girl to be forever told that her parents wanted a boy. it’s just as bad a killing the person.  its also frustrating for the folks. have a look at that princess back in japan, her in-laws and the japs gave her a tough time because she had girls. if she were allowed to have a boy so japan will its emperor, surely she would of taken that path.
the funny thing is tim cannon says lets not be picky in the end when his being mr pick-a-dillo himself.

Kerry says:

12:28am | 08/08/10

Freddy , if you are implying contraceptives as precautions - it’s just as good as abortion and being pro-choice.  and what do u mean by ” decide quickly”  - do you mean abort early?