Completely disagree. It's great that she has adjusted very well to her deafness but she can't go so far as to say that it wasn't hard to deal with all the issues she has had to overcome. What Mingo said to her came across as a little harsh but those things were true.
Also, how can she go push her brother into being OK with a baby who has Downs considering his relationship with Lily was rocky, he is 20, without a degree and has an unstable career. Having a disabled child is different, but it is undoubtedly more difficult to raise them and there is no denying that their disability will be deeply saddening to a parent at some level forever. That's not to say you don't love that child as any other, of course you do, maybe you even love them more, but her whole argument saying it isn't sad or difficult to deal with it is something I didn't agree with at all.
Switched at Birth has absolutely opened my eyes to looking at what people label as a "disability" as nothing more than a difference.
I am done with my preconceived notion of how a life should be. I realize now that anything that might be interpreted as a negative in life would also have positives that come along with it.
Who is to say that what society has perceived as "normal" and "able" actually is better?
Happiness comes in many forms. People who seemingly have it all are sometimes the most miserable. While people who seemingly have nothing, sometimes are happy beyond measure.
Who is any one of us to choose what is right or best for another? How do we know? We don't.
There may be blessings that come from being Deaf, or from having Down syndrome, or from being a quadriplegic, or from being born without limbs, or from being born with an illness that will shorten your life to only a few years, or even a few hours.
How are any of us to know?
It is so easy to say, "That's different from me. I wouldn't want that for myself. That's not good."
But I guarantee you that there ARE good things about all of those situations. People in those situations have riches that we cannot imagine, unless we walk in their shoes. And we have riches that they cannot imagine.
It is not better or worse. It is just different.
I love life enough that I would like to experience it in every way possible. Perhaps some of those variations might involve countless pain. But GOOD things come out of pain. Good things come out of heartache, suffering, and loss.
Nothing in life is really a loss, because all of our losses come with gains.
If we take away our preconceived notions about how life should be. Then we realize that no outcome is better than another. They are all just different.
Those of us with the easiest lives are often the saddest.
Toby has had everything handed to him on a silver platter, for his whole life. That night that he performed a musical number, with his mother, at The Cracked Mug, he told Kathryn he felt like a failure in life.
If Toby allows it to be, this baby could be EXACTLY what he needs to give his life meaning and direction. Toby has been searching for both and coming up empty handed everywhere he turns.
So what if it is a struggle? So what if it is sad at times? Sadness and struggle come with their own payoffs.
Switched at Birth has absolutely opened my eyes to looking at what people label as a "disability" as nothing more than a difference.
I am done with my preconceived notion of how a life should be. I realize now that anything that might be interpreted as a negative in life would also have positives that come along with it.
Who is to say that what society has perceived as "normal" and "able" actually is better?
Happiness comes in many forms. People who seemingly have it all are sometimes the most miserable. While people who seemingly have nothing, sometimes are happy beyond measure.
Who is any one of us to choose what is right or best for another? How do we know? We don't.
I agree with you. I think much of the "hardness" comes from people who are "able bodied" and stigmatize anyone who is differently abled. I really felt for Daphne in that scene with Mingo. While, yes, DS and Deafness are very different, she's absolutely correct in that people see them both as disabilities and the people who have them as inferior to those who do not. If you could test for deafness from the womb, you bet there would be people like Mingo advocating aborting deaf babies because "their lives would be so much harder." However, we make accommodations harder and make people feel bad/insecure for actually utilizing the accommodations they are entitled to (like Daphne not wanting an interpreter because others scoff at it and it makes her stand out) in order to give everyone equal opportunity and then point to the red tape/discrimination and say, "But look how much their lives suck, who would want to be like that?!" The cultural mindset needs to start changing. Problem is, those are the last things to change in society. People start going on about the "PC Brigade" in attempt to keep the status quo.
Switched at Birth is a phenomenal show for raising issues like this and giving us a lot of characters we barely see represented in media. The more diversity people see in their lives, even if it's through fiction, the more it's normalized and accepted. SaB broke ground by being an ongoing series where Daphne, one of the two star characters of the show, is Deaf, and Emmett, another main cast member who was also Deaf (and played by a Deaf actor to boot). Not to mention the many other Deaf recurring characters (and actors). The concept was so unheard of that that's how Constance Marie ended up having to stop signing because she did too much ASL too fast (probably didn't realize she needed to do hand warmups to help prevent repetitive motion injuries) and developed problems in her hands. No one realized this would happen because a show like SaB had never been attempted before. The more exposure you have, the more people can learn and understand and not find things different to themselves so unimaginable or terrible. I want to see the day someone is able to use their accommodations, in whatever form they're in, during class and nobody blinks because it's just business as usual; it's just everyone learning with the tools they need to have an equal education.
Switched at Birth has absolutely opened my eyes to looking at what people label as a "disability" as nothing more than a difference.
Who is to say that what society has perceived as "normal" and "able" actually is better?
Oh this is so painfully stupid and naive.
Guess what: people are meant to have sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste. That's NORMAL. That is what evolution (not society) has defined as normal.
So, are you saying that my two cousins who have been both deaf and blind since their youth aren't normal?
Of course they aren't. Being blind and deaf is not normal. It HAPPENS and it sucks, and they can still manage, but to call being blind and deaf from birth "normal" is just objectively untrue and insultingly stupid.
reply share
I've said all I have to say to you. There's nothing more that needs to be said. You've made your point of view very clear. Nothing you can say is going to make me believe that your mindset isn't narrow-minded, ignorant and hateful.
'Normal' is subjective to one's opinion and not define by society.
Oh grow up. Yeah, someone being 8 feet tall isn't normal. Being born deaf and blind isn't normal. Being born without a tongue isn't normal.
You can play the "normal is subjective" up to a point, but even you have to acquiesce that things that are SO uncommon as to be tiny outliers in the population are not normal.
reply share
You are SO right and I couldn't help but chuckle at your comments.
When you have a fever and get a cold sore what will the doctor say? "Oh that's NORMAL - it's common to have a cold sore after a fever" when you can't see or hear I don't think any doctor will say "Oh that's normal. Don't need to make any adjustments to your life"
You do realize that I'm upset because she said that my cousins are not normal. Don't you? That's completely different than her merely saying that their condition, which they cannot help, isn't normal. She didn't settle for that, though. She labeled my cousins as people who are not normal. Those are two very different things.
If you were in my shoes, and someone said that two of your family members aren't normal, maybe you'd be singing a different tune. So don't judge me for being more than a little ticked off by the fact that anyone would write off my family members - people I love, people I'm very protective of - as not normal.
I understand that it's hurtful because they're your family but it isn't an insult. It's just a fact. They're condition is what makes them different ergo not normal. I'm sure your cousins are wonderful people but they have challenges. Maybe "normal"comes off a little harsh but you can't say that they are, you get what I mean?
I accept it - I have a cousin who is developmentally slow and doesn't speak at age 8. That isn't normal. He isn't a normal kid.
I example have minor central neurosystem damage which causes problems example with hand eye coordination etc.. But I wouldn't say I`m not normal just having more challenges with some things than majority.
I have heard wrongly people labeling me as mentally challenged as kid so I'm not telling about this to people usually anymore so I'm not judged wrongly because just one minor thing.
So most of the time it's really just about something being different than not being normal.
People should stop using the word "normal" nothing is and no one is "normal". It's such an uneducated and irrelevant word in today's world. It sets some kind of standard on human beings, when everyone knows everyone is born different.
Guess what: people are meant to have sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste. That's NORMAL. That is what evolution (not society) has defined as normal.
Your comment doesn't offend me. Sorry, since that's what you were aiming to do.
You do come across as incredibly narrow-minded, obnoxious, self-righteous, and condescending. That's okay, though. As I said, it takes all kinds to make the world go around. We need your kind, too.
As for evolution, the species is changing all of the time. Just because sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste are common at the moment, it doesn't mean that these things always will be common.
Evolution is the reason we have mutations and genetic variations in the first place.
What do you freakin' think allows us to survive?
You might see yourself as up there on your high horse, but so far, you have not impressed me.
reply share
What allows us to survive is our intellect and our developments like medicine, extending life spans and icnreasing survival chances.
But when we don't have one sense, we are at a disadvantage and at a higher risk. A deaf person will not be able to hear someone approaching like, for exmaple, a hearing or blind person could when walking through an empty street, dark alley etc.
A blind person can always not see a car approaching.
A person without the ability to feel touch, a condition extending to many more bodily functions, has to always be monitored, either by themselves or by someone else, and they are at a high risk of not knowing when they are injured which can lead to fatal injuries.
No one is saying that that makes them bad people or worthless or poorer in perspective.
But it IS objectively a disadvantage. It's only our inventions that allow us to not see it that way first. Someone living in, like, rural Somalia, will not be able to see it the same way because their living conditions are much different.
YOU are on a high horse right now. You come off as thinking you're oh so wonderful for sticking up for disabled people. But in reality, you are damaging their cause. It is never beneficial to look at the good sides while completely ignoring the disadvantages.
That's just like saying that not being disabled is great and all, while leaving out that that easily leads to ignorance.
Get off your horse. Disabled people are not bad, not all experience disadvantages, but many do and many will, and to pretend like that doesn't happen is extremely disrespectful towards them.
And just in the case that I need real life experience to qualify: I have a sister and my mother who are both hard of hearing, as was my grandfather (due to work conditions).
reply share
Sure, our senses can allow an individual to survive in a particular circumstance, but the survival of our species, and ultimately of life forms in general, depends upon mutations and genetic variations.
What allows us to survive is our intellect and our developments like medicine, extending life spans and icnreasing survival chances.
Again, you are talking about the individual, and I am talking about the species (and life on this earth in general).
But when we don't have one sense, we are at a disadvantage and at a higher risk. A deaf person will not be able to hear someone approaching like, for exmaple, a hearing or blind person could when walking through an empty street, dark alley etc.
Or perhaps, a deaf person will not be distracted by a loud noise, or even a low hum, and therefore will see some danger that a hearing person will miss.
THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO BE FOR EVERY SITUATION.
A blind person can always not see a car approaching.
But a blind person might hear a car approaching, when a person with sight is distracted by his cell phone screen.
There is no way to second guess.
A person without the ability to feel touch, a condition extending to many more bodily functions, has to always be monitored, either by themselves or by someone else, and they are at a high risk of not knowing when they are injured which can lead to fatal injuries.
True.
But researchers at Cambridge University are turning to just that community of individuals, as they attempt to develop a drug to control pain. Our species benefits because of their existence. For those individuals, the situation is a mixed blessing and curse, like everything else in life.
Everything has its advantages and disadvantages. No one way of being is superior in all situations. Circumstances will always exist where it is better to be different, just like circumstances will always exist where it is better to be the same.
No one is saying that that makes them bad people or worthless or poorer in perspective.
I didn't think you were saying that.
It's been so long since I have read all of the posts on this thread that I cannot remember if anyone else was saying that.
But it IS objectively a disadvantage. It's only our inventions that allow us to not see it that way first. Someone living in, like, rural Somalia, will not be able to see it the same way because their living conditions are much different.
I disagree.
Being differently able (or disabled) is objectively a disadvantage in certain situations and it is objectively an advantage in others.
YOU are on a high horse right now. You come off as thinking you're oh so wonderful for sticking up for disabled people. But in reality, you are damaging their cause. It is never beneficial to look at the good sides while completely ignoring the disadvantages.
I was on a high horse when I made my original posts months ago. I was being attacked personally, and that tends to put me on the defensive.
I'm actually not sticking up for disabled people, though, not now or then. You have me pegged wrong. That had nothing to do with my high horse.
I find it ironic you say it is "never beneficial to look at the good sides, while completely ignoring the disadvantages," when that is what I see you as doing.
You are only looking at the good sides of being normal, and you are refusing to see the disadvantages of being normal. My position is (and has always been) that there are advantages to BOTH ways of being. There are advantages to ALL ways of being.
That's my position in a nutshell, and it has nothing to do with sticking up for disabled people or being politically correct (which I am about as far from as a human being ever could be).
I'm just talking LOGIC 101. That's all I have ever been doing here on this board. Well, that, and sometimes I wax romantic about poetry and love.
But whatever.
That's just like saying that not being disabled is great and all, while leaving out that that easily leads to ignorance.
Even ignorance has its advantages.
You really don't get it, do you? There is no ONE superior way of being for every circumstance. It takes all kinds to make the world go round (or in this case, to maximize survival of the species).
Get off your horse. Disabled people are not bad, not all experience disadvantages, but many do and many will, and to pretend like that doesn't happen is extremely disrespectful towards them.
And just in the case that I need real life experience to qualify: I have a sister and my mother who are both hard of hearing, as was my grandfather (due to work conditions).
I never said that differently able people do not experience disadvantages. I only said that able people experience disadvantages, too.
I have real-life experience, too. It's not needed to qualify. We all have real-life experiences.
reply share
Sure, our senses can allow an individual to survive in a particular circumstance, but the survival of our species, and ultimately of life forms in general, depends upon mutations and genetic variations.
But we should not pretend that our senses have no part in that whatsoever.
Again, you are talking about the individual, and I am talking about the species (and life on this earth in general).
Me too. Technological and medical development has increased the chances of the species.
Or perhaps, a deaf person will not be distracted by a loud noise, or even a low hum, and therefore will see some danger that a hearing person will miss.
THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO BE FOR EVERY SITUATION.
I KNOW THAT. Which is why everyone who claims that there is NO hardship whatsoever to deafness, for example, is completely idiotic. There are always hardships and disadvantages. Just like they are always advantages.
But those who pretend like there are no disadvantages, they are not doing those they intend to defend any good. They are harming their cause, even.
But a blind person might hear a car approaching, when a person with sight is distracted by his cell phone screen.
There is no way to second guess.
And there is no way to ignore the disadvantages of a condition without sounding like a complete idiot.
Everything has its advantages and disadvantages. No one way of being is superior in all situations. Circumstances will always exist where it is better to be different, just like circumstances will always exist where it is better to be the same.
Still, so many people on this thread spout "Being deaf is great and always great and it's never hard at all!!11!". Which is simply wrong. And you fall into that too. You seem very optimistic about it, when it's not asked to be either optimistic or pessimistic, but to simply acknowledge that everything has it's advantages and it's disadvantages.
I didn't think you were saying that.
Quite some people here seem to see that thought behind every small criticism, though.
Being differently able (or disabled) is objectively a disadvantage in certain situations and it is objectively an advantage in others.
And I disagree. It is only an advantage where it is allowed to be - as in, where there are things that make it less of a disadvantage. Like sign language. Door bells with light. Video calls. Without these things, a deaf person in the western world is at a major disadvantage. With them it becomes less so.
I was on a high horse when I made my original posts months ago. I was being attacked personally, and that tends to put me on the defensive.
I get that. I typically judge a comment the way I see it, even if I see that it was made some time ago. I usually have no other way to verify how the position has changed until now.
You are only looking at the good sides of being normal, and you are refusing to see the disadvantages of being normal. My position is (and has always been) that there are advantages to BOTH ways of being. There are advantages to ALL ways of being.
Then you have misunderstood me entirely. I am focusing on the disadvantages of not being normal as a response to those who ignore them. If I were to go into the disadvantages of being normal, I would be quick to list things like a higher risk for ignorance, a smaller appreciation for XYZ, less focus than for example a deaf person can have, etc.
But when I answer to those who want to pretend that not being normal has no disadvantages at all, of course I am going to focus on proving them wrong.
'm just talking LOGIC 101. That's all I have ever been doing here on this board. Well, that, and sometimes I wax romantic about poetry and love.
NO ONE talks Logic 101. We are humans. We are not capable of being completely logical. You too have quite some illogical things you said. That's completely normal. Everyone who thinks and talks does that.
You really don't get it, do you? There is no ONE superior way of being for every circumstance.
I would never say that there is, and I demand that you acknowledge that.
I never said that differently able people do not experience disadvantages. I only said that able people experience disadvantages, too.
Of course they do. Everyone does. Everything does. That's the way of life.
I have real-life experience, too. It's not needed to qualify. We all have real-life experiences.
There are quite some people here who I would suspect of demanding RL experience to qualify.
reply share
I actually feel the same way about your point of view.
I enjoy my senses of sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste, but that doesn't mean that different benefits would not come from losing one or all of those senses.
People without one sense are stronger in other senses. That has the potential to be a benefit. Helen Keller was missing sight and hearing, and her words express some of the most emotionally intelligent and intellectually intelligent ideas I have read. Perhaps losing a sense or two increases our depth as human beings.
Perhaps it will take someone missing one or more senses to have the needed perspective to solve some of the world's problems that your so-called normal people have not been able to tackle yet.
I am glad we live in a diverse world where people have many different perspectives. Ultimately, it increases the odds in our favor.
“Humanity is evolving in the direction of not doing what it does,” said Anatoly Agulyansky, a process development and improvement expert with Intel's nanotechnology department. Just because sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste are what we do now, it does not mean it will be what we do in the future. Who knows? Perhaps deaf or blind people are ahead of our time. Maybe those senses are not as necessary as you believe.
As Steve Maraboli says, “Look around you. Everything changes. Everything on this earth is in a continuous state of evolving, refining, improving, adapting, enhancing, changing. You were not put on this earth to remain stagnant.”
I do not see our differences as disabilities. I just don't.
reply share
Also, how can she go push her brother into being OK with a baby who has Downs considering his relationship with Lily was rocky, he is 20, without a degree and has an unstable career. Having a disabled child is different, but it is undoubtedly more difficult to raise them and there is no denying that their disability will be deeply saddening to a parent at some level forever. That's not to say you don't love that child as any other, of course you do, maybe you even love them more, but her whole argument saying it isn't sad or difficult to deal with it is something I didn't agree with at all.
Look at it from her perspective of being labeled as a 'disabled' person and how her brother is reacting, like having a child with a disability is the absolute worse thing that could happen. And he's gotta get 'okay with it' - this is his reality and he needs to stop playing the woe is me, it's too hard card and deal with it. Her attitude is right, they can't look at it as it's going to be hard, they need to go at it as it's going to be different.
reply share
Look at it from her perspective of being labeled as a 'disabled' person and how her brother is reacting, like having a child with a disability is the absolute worse thing that could happen.
It certainly is one of them!
When the stars are the only things we share Will you be there?
I don't think Daphne understands what it means to raise a differently abled person. Her mother always made her feel that she was just different, that there was nothing wrong with her per sae. I was raised with a mentally disabled uncle, he was not born that way, but my grandmother explained to me he heartbreak of realizing that her son was not advancing at the same rate as her older son. You see when you have children you dream about all the wonderful things they will be and then something like this, and everything changes. Like Mingo said, that child's life will be harder, those parents life raising that child financially and emotionally will be more difficult then the average family. I personally would keep the child, because I couldn't imagine my life without my uncle and giving up a baby that could be like him is just inconceivable. However, as a girl who was abandoned by her parents, I understand what it's like to be born to parents who do not want you. Because of this and more, I am pro-choice. I think every family needs to do what's right for them, not everyone is capable of being parents let alone parents to a differently abled child. I'm not sure what choice they'll make, but this is very forward thinking television. For another look into a family dealing with a differently abled child, check out Parenthood.
While I agree with you that every family needs to do what is right for them, I need to clarify what you are saying.
Are you saying that because you were abandoned by your parents, you wish you had never been born? Would you rather your parents aborted you, than to have you and abandon you?
It's a valid wish. I'm not arguing. You are just the first person I have seen wish for that, so I want to be sure that is what you are saying.
I think that I would rather have any life, than no life, but of course, until I try every other life, that is just theory.
You may not have ever met someone who said they would rather having not been born but there are actually many people who have said that. Most of the time these people have been written off as having a mental disability. Also what about kids born into extreme poverty where they are starving and constantly sick and malnourished, kids who are badly beaten and abused constantly because they are born to parents who don't know how to take care of them, kids that are born with a severe disease that their only home is the hospital, kids that are born to drug adicts so strung up that the child is born addicted to the drugs and has mental deficiencies or does not survive more than a few months. Most of these children cannot talk or pass before being able to develop critical thing to answer such a question. Furthermore Many children each year unfortunately feel this way and actually take their own life because they are so miserable because they are bullied or unaccepted for who they are whether it's due to differences because of disability, sexuality, or other another reason. I'm not saying these people's lives don't matter or that they should feel this way. I wish they didn't. Their lives matter a lot and show many of the things that are wrong with society today. But the world is not ideal and not everyone is happy with their life.
I do plan to adopt and I teach special needs children and I love my job and students. I cannot imagine how difficult their families' lives are. But I am also pro choice because I don't think a child should be born into a family that truly does not want them or cannot provide for them for whatever reason. While I want to adopt, I don't think a woman should be forced to carry a child only to give it up for adoption if she is unable to mentally or physically (for health reasons) do so.
You may not have ever met someone who said they would rather having not been born but there are actually many people who have said that.
I believe you. I just haven't seen it myself.
Most of the time these people have been written off as having a mental disability. Also what about kids born into extreme poverty where they are starving and constantly sick and malnourished, kids who are badly beaten and abused constantly because they are born to parents who don't know how to take care of them, kids that are born with a severe disease that their only home is the hospital, kids that are born to drug adicts so strung up that the child is born addicted to the drugs and has mental deficiencies or does not survive more than a few months.
Okay, what about them?
I'd rather have life in extreme poverty, starving, sick, malnourished, beaten abused, diseased, addicted, deficient, and so on and so forth, than to not have life at all.
People are too hung up on pain and struggle. Adversity makes us stronger. Or it doesn't. But either way, pain and struggle are a part of life.
Most of these children cannot talk or pass before being able to develop critical thing to answer such a question. Furthermore Many children each year unfortunately feel this way and actually take their own life because they are so miserable because they are bullied or unaccepted for who they are whether it's due to differences because of disability, sexuality, or other another reason. I'm not saying these people's lives don't matter or that they should feel this way. I wish they didn't. Their lives matter a lot and show many of the things that are wrong with society today. But the world is not ideal and not everyone is happy with their life.
So what?
I"m not trying to be obtuse. I really do not know what your point is.
So someone takes his or her own life. At least, he or she had a life to take.
To not have a child because he or she may commit suicide one day is like not sending a child to school because he or she may drop out of school one day.
It doesn't make sense.
I do plan to adopt and I teach special needs children and I love my job and students. I cannot imagine how difficult their families' lives are. But I am also pro choice because I don't think a child should be born into a family that truly does not want them or cannot provide for them for whatever reason. While I want to adopt, I don't think a woman should be forced to carry a child only to give it up for adoption if she is unable to mentally or physically (for health reasons) do so.
I am pro-choice, too, but not for any of the reasons you mentioned. I am pro-choice because, ironically, as wrong as abortion is, sometimes, it is still the best answer.
reply share
I'd rather have life in extreme poverty, starving, sick, malnourished, beaten abused, diseased, addicted, deficient, and so on and so forth, than to not have life at all.
Then you must not now what that feels like. At least, I mostly hear that out of that corner.
While there are people who are able to see the good things in life because of their bad experiences, there are many who experience the opposite.
I, for one, would much prefer not to have been born. For my sake, being spared my life, as well as for my mother's, who was simply incapable of raising four children, but decided to have them anyway.
People are too hung up on pain and struggle. Adversity makes us stronger. Or it doesn't. But either way, pain and struggle are a part of life.
Yeah. No. Don't say that to people who actually suffer. I'd punch you if you said that to my face. And no, I'm not "too hung up" on my pain. I can't help how I feel about it. No one can. We are humans, not computers - we are incapable of controlling ourselves to such a degree.
So someone takes his or her own life. At least, he or she had a life to take.
And had to suffer so much before being able to do that. Why should they not wish that the pain had never happened? What good is a life that is only pain just because it's lived?
To not have a child because he or she may commit suicide one day is like not sending a child to school because he or she may drop out of school one day.
You REALLY don't get this.
It's people who want to or actually commit suicide who say "I'd rather not have been born". Not the parents who say "I'd rather have never had them".
When parents say "I judge this criteria of my child's potential life to be too painful to be raised with", that is not equal to dropping out of school. Whatever goes through your mind? I'd punch you again if you said that to my face. Seriously.
I am pro-choice, too, but not for any of the reasons you mentioned. I am pro-choice because, ironically, as wrong as abortion is, sometimes, it is still the best answer.
People can be pro choice and still say *beep* You clearly have no idea what you were talking about in that post. Turn around and get yourself informed before coming back. Especially because at some point, you might really walk into someone who will be able to punch you for what you say.
reply share
Then you must not now what that feels like. At least, I mostly hear that out of that corner.
While there are people who are able to see the good things in life because of their bad experiences, there are many who experience the opposite.
I, for one, would much prefer not to have been born. For my sake, being spared my life, as well as for my mother's, who was simply incapable of raising four children, but decided to have them anyway.
If you were never born, you would not have the choice to do something about it.
Yeah. No. Don't say that to people who actually suffer. I'd punch you if you said that to my face. And no, I'm not "too hung up" on my pain. I can't help how I feel about it. No one can. We are humans, not computers - we are incapable of controlling ourselves to such a degree.
You seem to think suffering gives you some special privilege. It doesn't. And you are quite hung up on physical violence. You should seek help for that.
And had to suffer so much before being able to do that. Why should they not wish that the pain had never happened? What good is a life that is only pain just because it's lived?
I never said that anyone should not wish that the pain never happened. Whoever wants to wish that the pain never happened is welcome to wish that. What I said is that no one has the right to take away someone else's opportunity for life, in order to spare that person perceived pain.
There are MANY people who have lives filled with pain and find lots of good in their pain-filled life. Just because you are not one of them, does not give you the right to take away their opportunity to find the goodness in a painful life.
You REALLY don't get this.
It's people who want to or actually commit suicide who say "I'd rather not have been born". Not the parents who say "I'd rather have never had them".
When parents say "I judge this criteria of my child's potential life to be too painful to be raised with", that is not equal to dropping out of school. Whatever goes through your mind? I'd punch you again if you said that to my face. Seriously.
No, you don't get it. And there you go with the violence again. You really do need help for that.
Once a fetus becomes viable outside the womb, a parent has no right to take away that child's life, because it may (or may not) be painful.
People can be pro choice and still say *beep* You clearly have no idea what you were talking about in that post. Turn around and get yourself informed before coming back. Especially because at some point, you might really walk into someone who will be able to punch you for what you say.
You need help for your anger.
I will not kowtow to anyone, especially a terrorist like yourself.
I will continue to share my point of view, whether you (or anyone else) punches me or not. And I will pursue all legal means against you.
reply share
I also have to disagree. I have family and friends that are blind, paralyzed and have different levels of mental retardation, and deafness. By witnessing how their lives are every bit as rich and meaningful as a 'normal' person, I wouldn't be afraid to have a child that wasn't completely able bodied, I would just have to do things differently. Having a disability, or a disabled child isn't always the end of the world for some people.
i am currently pregnant with my first child. my older brother has autism and so does my cousin's son. i definitely worry my child will be autistic. of course i would love my child whether regardless but i saw growing up how difficult it is.
Deaf people can look after themselves and don't require adult supervision in later life. DS people rarely can look after themselves and require adult supervision.
DS is definitely harder than being deaf and also different.
While I agree that Switched has been great for opening people's eyes to issues the deaf community deals with on a daily basis, I think she is way off treating DS as the same as deafness. The difficulties the parent of a DS child faces are infinitely more than the parent of a deaf child. Also, the way she framed her argument made it sound like Toby didn't care about the baby if they chose abortion, however, maybe he was actually considering the child more than she was. Quality of life should be taken into account in this instance. My biggest issue with this "storyline" though is that it's happening to Toby & Lily...and that they decided to go ahead with the pregnancy. Toby is unemployed, he has struggled and struggled to find himself & he's still not there yet, he can barely take care of himself & now they want to give him a special needs child? Then there's Lily, who can't make up her mind whether she wants Toby or to be with an older man (uh and how do we know it's nit his kid?!?), her job is on shaky ground, she doesn't seem ready for parenthood either....and together, their relationship has been a hot mess. This is not the environment to bring a healthy baby into and yet they want to bring a special needs baby into it?!? All I can hear is "Danger Will Robinson, danger!" It just feels like the writers are grasping at straws, trying to push every "Afterschool Special" type issue into the show, and sadly it's just not working. It feels like the show has completely lost its way and this is just going to push it further and further off track.
While I agree that Switched has been great for opening people's eyes to issues the deaf community deals with on a daily basis, I think she is way off treating DS as the same as deafness. The difficulties the parent of a DS child faces are infinitely more than the parent of a deaf child. Also, the way she framed her argument made it sound like Toby didn't care about the baby if they chose abortion, however, maybe he was actually considering the child more than she was. Quality of life should be taken into account in this instance. My biggest issue with this "storyline" though is that it's happening to Toby & Lily...and that they decided to go ahead with the pregnancy. Toby is unemployed, he has struggled and struggled to find himself & he's still not there yet, he can barely take care of himself & now they want to give him a special needs child? Then there's Lily, who can't make up her mind whether she wants Toby or to be with an older man (uh and how do we know it's nit his kid?!?), her job is on shaky ground, she doesn't seem ready for parenthood either....and together, their relationship has been a hot mess. This is not the environment to bring a healthy baby into and yet they want to bring a special needs baby into it?!? All I can hear is "Danger Will Robinson, danger!" It just feels like the writers are grasping at straws, trying to push every "Afterschool Special" type issue into the show, and sadly it's just not working. It feels like the show has completely lost its way and this is just going to push it further and further off track.
I disagree.
Who gets to determine quality of life? You?
No thanks.
Quality of life is subjective. The perfect life you are envisioning may be crap to someone else. And what you believe is crap may be someone else's idea of heaven. No one can define that for anyone else.
And this baby could be exactly what Toby needs to give his life some direction. He has had everything handed to him on a silver platter, and he is drifting without purpose. Now, Toby has a reason to try.
Sure, it could blow up in his face, too. But that's life.
If children waited until their parents were financially stable and madly in love to arrive, then our population would dwindle down to next to nothing.
Money and love can both be made. I am not worried about Toby & Lily one bit.
As for the "Afterschool Special" feeling, I don't see it. When I look at the series as a whole from Season 1 until now, I see so many connections and pieces falling into place that I am impressed.
What I meant by quality of life was that TOBY may have actually been considering the quality of life a DS child of his could expect to have....a decision that yes I absolutely think each parent would need to consider if they are being a responsible parent. In NO way was I claiming that I would make that decision for the character. I would just hope that Toby & Lily would consider this, and not just "yeah now my life has purpose", what a dumb reason to have a child! That shows complete immaturity! A person should already have purpose in their life, not expect a child to give them purpose. Either way, it's fine you disagree with me,but why did you feel it necessary to go comment on every post I made in regards to this episode solely to tell me you disagree?
Either way, it's fine you disagree with me,but why did you feel it necessary to go comment on every post I made in regards to this episode solely to tell me you disagree?
Why did you feel a need to make so many posts?
Whatever your answer is to that question would be the same as my answer to your question.
To be honest, I didn't even pay attention to who had made the posts. I quickly peruse the threads. When I have a response, I make it. When I don't have a response, I don't.
Usually, I reply to the comments that I feel are the most intelligent. So perhaps what you had to say struck me as worthy of comment. I don't reply to stupidity.
I'm sorry if it made you feel uncomfortable. I wasn't singling you out. I didn't realize that I was responding to you that many times.
reply share
Comparing deafness to Down syndrome is ridiculous. Not all disabilities require the same amount of care. Our neighbors have 2 kids with disabilities--one of which is autism. They will never be able to take care of themselves. They get mistreated at school. Their father cries after the kids go to bed. They go to countless doctors visits and physical therapy. They are lived just as much if not more than other children but their lives are hard, not just different.
*** Truth be told, I had to see you one more time, even if it was from a distance.
Now the child will. What about when J and K die? When Toby dies? Bay? There are many times when the child outlives the people that gave he/she a good support system. The parents that decide what to do with the pregnancy shouldn't be just deciding if they can handle raising the child to adulthood. They also need to decide if it's best for the child to try to support itself or rely on others once he/she reaches adulthood.
*** Truth be told, I had to see you one more time, even if it was from a distance.
reply share