It's not often that you read a headline like "New Era, New Worry," followed by a subhead that says, "New tests for Down syndrome could lead to more abortions and less support for families." Even though it is self-evident that making it easier/"safer" to test for Down syndrome will mean more abortions, it's atypical for an account to note that an entire class of people, seemingly targeted for extinction, faces an even greater danger.

Ben and Max Allard, outside their home in Franklin, Mass.

The story, written by Newsweek's Mary Carmichael, does not go beyond describing the "new, noninvasive genetic screens" that are to arrive in doctor's offices next year as "pos[ing] no harm to fetuses or mothers." What she does do well is remind her readers of the current two-step screening process which operates like a kind of speed bump that at least partially slows down the rush to abort.

Using blood screens and ultrasounds, physicians will tell a woman they suspect her child may have Down syndrome. This is then "confirmed with invasive tests such as amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling, which insert needles into the uterus and slightly increase the risk of miscarriage," Carmichael writes. "Some women forgo the tests for that reason."

A confirmed diagnosis will result in an abortion 90% of the time, according to various studies. Only 5,000 children with Down syndrome are born annually in the United States. And with the new genetic screens, now even that reason for hesitancy will be removed.

New techniques aside, it's not hard to understand why these babies are targeted for death. Carmichael uses the case of Beth Allard to document the fact that most physicians know nothing about Down syndrome and consequently paint the most relentlessly negative picture possible.  Allard's pediatrician almost talked her into having an abortion, telling her that, "You're going to end up divorced. Don't even bother having any other children. Didn't you have the option to terminate?"

What doctors don't know really does kill unborn babies diagnosed with Down syndrome. A 2000 study in Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights found that "23 percent of doctors admitted trying to influence mothers' decisions, usually encouraging them to abort."

Dr. Brian Skotko, a pediatrics resident at Children's Hospital Boston, "who has studied how doctors tell patients about sensitive diagnoses," told Carmichael, "Even among obstetrics fellows, 45 percent said their training in how to deliver a diagnosis was barely adequate or nonexistent."
So what is that doctors don't know? Let me count the ways.

"Many doctors seem unaware that early intervention with speech and occupational therapy, combined with medications or corrective heart surgery, has allowed some children to grow up relatively normally, graduating from high school and holding jobs, "Carmichael writes. "In a large 2005 survey, mothers of children with Down syndrome said they had received little or no information about the positive side of the condition. (Families often end up stronger. A 2003 study in the American Journal on Mental Retardation found that healthy siblings are highly empathetic; another study in the same journal this year showed that parents are less likely to divorce.)"

Carmichael writes that a bill based on Skotko's research--"one calling for doctors to provide 'accurate and up-to-date information' about Down syndrome to expectant parents" --had gotten nowhere in Congress until it suddenly passed last September. To date there's been no funding allocated.

Let me conclude by quoting the end of Carmichael's article, which offers hope in an otherwise bleak situation.

"The Allards are among those supporters. They testified on the bill's behalf, hoping to show lawmakers the kind of life they believed their doctors hadn't told them about. They have a strong marriage, a healthy second son and a great sense of relief that they have their first one. Ben has something good, too--a new pediatrician."

Please send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com.

Part One