slowmutant wrote:
Quote:
Apparently, it's somewhat common for parents of autistic children to take measures to prevent themselves from having another autistic child because they have a word for it: "stoppage". They stop having children or they make sure to only have girls because girls are less likely to be diagnosed with an ASD.
I understand why parents of autistic children have that thing called stoppage. If one autistic child is a challenge, two could totally disrupt family life. The right to life obviously doesn't apply to children who have yet to be conceived. Practical considerations exist in every family.
I agree with this. However, according to that article I linked, stoppage has become the
expectation for families with a child not the spectrum. This includes kids with AS. As in parents are encouraged by their peers to have no more children after one child has been diagnosed with an ASD.
What I find more disturbing is the practice of using technology to select a female child in all pregnancies following the ASD diagnosis. IMO, it is not yet known whether ASDs are really more common in males or if they are just diagnosed more frequently in males. Also, this practice of selecting for a child that is statistically less likely to be diagnosed with an ASD seems sketchy for a lot of reasons. What if the girl does turn out to have an ASD? What if she turns out to be challenging to raise for different reasons? If this were to become a common practice, what would the implications be? An unbalanced male to female ratio?
When you get pregnant, you aren't guaranteed a normal child who will be easy to raise. If that's what you want, you should get a robot instead.