“Prenatal care has become the biggest barrier to postnatal life.”

 

This lament by a dear friend who is a neonatologist points to the fact that it is often our attitude toward “the least of these” that determines their outcomes, and it is especially true for those diagnosed in the womb with developmental anomalies.

 

The published data certainly bear this out. Here is a small sampling.

 

• A Korean study using prenatal targeted ultrasonography to detect fetal anomalies found that “abortions were performed at a high rate, even for relatively mild anomalies or anomalies with good prognosis.”
• In the United Kingdom, almost 90 percent of all babies diagnosed in utero with Down syndrome (trisomy 21) were “screened out” by abortion in 2021. An earlier U.K. study found a 92 percent abortion rate for children diagnosed in the womb with Down syndrome.
• An Australian study reported a 93 percent abortion rate for babies diagnosed in the womb with Down syndrome.
• One study of the European population found 50 percent fewer babies born than expected with Down syndrome over the last four decades, and that from 2011 to 2015, abortions decreased the Down syndrome population in Europe by a rate of 27 percent.
• The U.S. does a poorer job of collecting this data than other countries, but one study found a range from 61 percent up to 93 percent of those diagnosed with Down syndrome in the womb who were aborted. Another study estimated that in recent years there were 33 percent fewer babies with Down syndrome born in the U.S. than could have been.
• And in a sad show of eugenics in 2017, Iceland reported it was on pace to virtually eliminate Down syndrome through abortion. Meaning they are actually not eliminating Down syndrome; they are eliminating people.
• Similar lethal outcomes are seen for those diagnosed in utero with trisomy 13 or trisomy 18. Reports range from 60 percent to 82 percent of babies detected in the womb with Trisomy 13 or 18 being aborted.

 

Poor attitudes are betrayed by the biased terminology often used to describe these diagnoses: “Incompatible with life,” “Lethal condition,” “Fatal fetal anomaly,” “A Life Not Worth Living.” The supposedly sage advice numerous parents hear is that their unborn child will not survive to birth, will suffer, will be a burden.

 

Yet, many babies with a prenatal diagnosis die not because of their medical condition, but because of the discrimination and denial of treatment from the medical establishment. Janvier and colleagues have documented how medical providers often withhold care for babies prenatally diagnosed with genetic disorders such as Trisomy 18 and Trisomy 13, making an in utero “lethal” determination into a reality, and noted significant bias among medical professionals toward abortion of unborn children diagnosed with genetic abnormalities. Another study found 89 percent to 100 percent acceptability among medical professionals even of late-term abortion of babies diagnosed in utero with severe fetal anomalies. As another article put it: “The presence of a prenatal diagnosis was the strongest independent factor negatively associated with longevity.”

 

The prevalent attitude for lethal prenatal discrimination has been furthered by the political class, who either promote unfettered abortion, or remove protections against prenatal discrimination in their platforms, and allow exceptions in protections against destruction of innocent life.

 

But are these attitudes based on reality, current evidence, or humanity? Not in the least!

 

For one thing, their mere existence as living beings shows these individuals are not “incompatible with life.” Every human life is limited—some live only minutes, some months, some decades. Yet, rather than destroying them, the nurturing of these lives for as long as they are given to us can have positive benefits for parents as well, especially if coupled with religious beliefs.

 

These preborn children are not their diagnosis. And their “life-limiting condition” may not actually portend dire outcomes, especially if interventions are undertaken.

 

Here are just a few examples.

 

Contrast the prevalent medical attitude about Down syndrome that leads to a lethal diagnosis, with the reality of recent facts about increased life span, health, learning and functional abilities, including people with Down syndrome who enjoy lifelong work until retirement from their job, including 99 percent who are happy with their lives, and love/are loved by their family.

 

Fetal surgeries for numerous conditions are now being treated at an array of centers across the nation. These in utero treatments include interventions for many cardiac anomalies that in years past would have led to death prior to or soon after birth.

 

Interventions reported for those with trisomy 13 or trisomy 18 have led to 81.5 percent survival, with these children surviving into their teen years and even into adult ages. There are positive ways to manage pregnancy and life after a prenatal diagnosis. As far as surviving and thriving, Bella Santorum turned 16 years old in May 2024.

 

Neurological conditions have also been addressed prenatally. Using prenatal enzyme replacement therapy, a fatal enzyme deficiency has been successfully treated in the womb. Another recent example is in-utero cerebrovascular surgery to treat vein of Galen malformation, a vascular malformation in the brain. As one article put it, in highlighting these two and several other prenatal interventions: “The next frontier in neurology is in utero.”

 

Finally, as far as attitude, we might take some tips from “primitive” cultures. A study of bones has revealed Down syndrome in a Neanderthal population, and survival of one child with Down syndrome for several years indicates the group “devoted extra resources and time to helping them survive.”

 

Another recent archeological study used paleogenomic methods to analyze 2,600-year-old DNA from burial sites, and they found three infants with Down syndrome and another infant with Edwards syndrome (trisomy 18.) Their findings validate previous work showing that prehistoric societies around the world cared for, and even revered, members with disabilities. Notably, the authors pointed out the caring shown to these individuals with trisomy:

 

“…there is clearly no evidence that they were stigmatised by their communities in the past.” “Overall, mortuary treatment provides a good indication of the attitudes communities had towards these individuals. All examples described in this study were cared for after death through various rituals, which show, in some cases exceptional, recognition of them as community members.”

 

What a contrast to “modern” society! Our attitude should be to consider these young individuals as equally valued human lives. Eliminating young lives is not the answer to eliminating disease and disability. Destroying the patient is not curative medicine.