What's new
Cystic Fibrosis Forum (EXP)

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Should bad genes mean no more kids?

JazzysMom

New member
**MODERATOR WARNING**

Because this issue has been brought up in the past & it became a heated & ugly debate at times.....this will be the only warning.

Should anyone get terribly rude or disrespectful regarding anyones choice in this matter the thread will be locked.

PLEASE give your opinions respectfully.

Thank you for your attention on this matter~
 

JazzysMom

New member
**MODERATOR WARNING**

Because this issue has been brought up in the past & it became a heated & ugly debate at times.....this will be the only warning.

Should anyone get terribly rude or disrespectful regarding anyones choice in this matter the thread will be locked.

PLEASE give your opinions respectfully.

Thank you for your attention on this matter~
 

JazzysMom

New member
**MODERATOR WARNING**

Because this issue has been brought up in the past & it became a heated & ugly debate at times.....this will be the only warning.

Should anyone get terribly rude or disrespectful regarding anyones choice in this matter the thread will be locked.

PLEASE give your opinions respectfully.

Thank you for your attention on this matter~
 

JazzysMom

New member
**MODERATOR WARNING**

Because this issue has been brought up in the past & it became a heated & ugly debate at times.....this will be the only warning.

Should anyone get terribly rude or disrespectful regarding anyones choice in this matter the thread will be locked.

PLEASE give your opinions respectfully.

Thank you for your attention on this matter~
 

JazzysMom

New member
**MODERATOR WARNING**
<br />
<br />Because this issue has been brought up in the past & it became a heated & ugly debate at times.....this will be the only warning.
<br />
<br />Should anyone get terribly rude or disrespectful regarding anyones choice in this matter the thread will be locked.
<br />
<br />PLEASE give your opinions respectfully.
<br />
<br />Thank you for your attention on this matter~
 

soderick

New member
I don't know how to guide you, but here is my opinion as a CFer. I was my parents' first child. They were scared out of their minds (especially because that was back in the day of very dark prognoses), but they still chose to have another child.

Luckily, my brother was born without CF. He's not even a carrier of the gene. Certainly there were problems. I was sick often had required a lot of attention, which left him feeling unappreciated at times. Had he been born with CF, though, there would have been plenty of other problems. There is no such thing as a family without problems, especially a family that must deal with CF.

My life would have been lacking if I had grown up without my brother. Despite the problems that arose, we are close and grateful to have one another.

If another baby is right for your family, it's right, even if the baby must face some challenges other children won't. I ascribe to Katie's quote: it's better to be born than not, even if that means dealing with CF. Now, I realize that doesn't address the fears and issues a parent must face. It's just another perspective.
 

soderick

New member
I don't know how to guide you, but here is my opinion as a CFer. I was my parents' first child. They were scared out of their minds (especially because that was back in the day of very dark prognoses), but they still chose to have another child.

Luckily, my brother was born without CF. He's not even a carrier of the gene. Certainly there were problems. I was sick often had required a lot of attention, which left him feeling unappreciated at times. Had he been born with CF, though, there would have been plenty of other problems. There is no such thing as a family without problems, especially a family that must deal with CF.

My life would have been lacking if I had grown up without my brother. Despite the problems that arose, we are close and grateful to have one another.

If another baby is right for your family, it's right, even if the baby must face some challenges other children won't. I ascribe to Katie's quote: it's better to be born than not, even if that means dealing with CF. Now, I realize that doesn't address the fears and issues a parent must face. It's just another perspective.
 

soderick

New member
I don't know how to guide you, but here is my opinion as a CFer. I was my parents' first child. They were scared out of their minds (especially because that was back in the day of very dark prognoses), but they still chose to have another child.

Luckily, my brother was born without CF. He's not even a carrier of the gene. Certainly there were problems. I was sick often had required a lot of attention, which left him feeling unappreciated at times. Had he been born with CF, though, there would have been plenty of other problems. There is no such thing as a family without problems, especially a family that must deal with CF.

My life would have been lacking if I had grown up without my brother. Despite the problems that arose, we are close and grateful to have one another.

If another baby is right for your family, it's right, even if the baby must face some challenges other children won't. I ascribe to Katie's quote: it's better to be born than not, even if that means dealing with CF. Now, I realize that doesn't address the fears and issues a parent must face. It's just another perspective.
 

soderick

New member
I don't know how to guide you, but here is my opinion as a CFer. I was my parents' first child. They were scared out of their minds (especially because that was back in the day of very dark prognoses), but they still chose to have another child.

Luckily, my brother was born without CF. He's not even a carrier of the gene. Certainly there were problems. I was sick often had required a lot of attention, which left him feeling unappreciated at times. Had he been born with CF, though, there would have been plenty of other problems. There is no such thing as a family without problems, especially a family that must deal with CF.

My life would have been lacking if I had grown up without my brother. Despite the problems that arose, we are close and grateful to have one another.

If another baby is right for your family, it's right, even if the baby must face some challenges other children won't. I ascribe to Katie's quote: it's better to be born than not, even if that means dealing with CF. Now, I realize that doesn't address the fears and issues a parent must face. It's just another perspective.
 

soderick

New member
I don't know how to guide you, but here is my opinion as a CFer. I was my parents' first child. They were scared out of their minds (especially because that was back in the day of very dark prognoses), but they still chose to have another child.
<br />
<br />Luckily, my brother was born without CF. He's not even a carrier of the gene. Certainly there were problems. I was sick often had required a lot of attention, which left him feeling unappreciated at times. Had he been born with CF, though, there would have been plenty of other problems. There is no such thing as a family without problems, especially a family that must deal with CF.
<br />
<br />My life would have been lacking if I had grown up without my brother. Despite the problems that arose, we are close and grateful to have one another.
<br />
<br />If another baby is right for your family, it's right, even if the baby must face some challenges other children won't. I ascribe to Katie's quote: it's better to be born than not, even if that means dealing with CF. Now, I realize that doesn't address the fears and issues a parent must face. It's just another perspective.
 

Sakem

New member
If only people with genes for stupidity were banned from procreation, the world would be a better place!
 

Sakem

New member
If only people with genes for stupidity were banned from procreation, the world would be a better place!
 

Sakem

New member
If only people with genes for stupidity were banned from procreation, the world would be a better place!
 

Sakem

New member
If only people with genes for stupidity were banned from procreation, the world would be a better place!
 

Sakem

New member
If only people with genes for stupidity were banned from procreation, the world would be a better place!
<br />
<br />
 

RonnieSharpe

New member
Here's a comment left on my blog responding to my post....What do you guys think? How would you answer?

"Soooo, just to play devil's advocate...

Let's say someone invented a vaccine for something annoying, but fairly harmless... roseola, for instance. But the vaccine also carried a 25% chance of causing CF. (I know that's not medically possible, just a hypothetical.) Would you give it to your newborn? What if there was a 50% chance? 100%?

My guess is that most people wouldn't even consider giving their kid a vaccine for a fairly harmless disease if there was a 25% chance of causing a serious illness instead. Maybe I am off on my guess though.

It's just an analogy... but still. Seems the outcome is the same. In choosing to have another child, you would be taking a 25% chance in creating a child with CF. Or in giving the hypothetical vaccine, the same 25% chance of creating CF.

It's interesting to me that a lot of the comments seem to touch on that having CF doesn't mean you can't be happy, that we should just leave it up to God, that tragedy could happen to anyone, that we love our kids no matter what disease they might have, etc. Which are all true, but seem to me to be incidental to the question.

I'm curious what the motivation is, for those who said they would choose to have kids, even with the 25% chance. Is it the internal drive to have your own biological kids? Is it that 25% isn't a high enough chance? Is it that you think CF isn't that big of a deal? Honestly, I am curious... why take the chance?"

I'd love to hear your response...you can also see all of the other comments at https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8121963203914214070&postID=1637367927530098130
 

RonnieSharpe

New member
Here's a comment left on my blog responding to my post....What do you guys think? How would you answer?

"Soooo, just to play devil's advocate...

Let's say someone invented a vaccine for something annoying, but fairly harmless... roseola, for instance. But the vaccine also carried a 25% chance of causing CF. (I know that's not medically possible, just a hypothetical.) Would you give it to your newborn? What if there was a 50% chance? 100%?

My guess is that most people wouldn't even consider giving their kid a vaccine for a fairly harmless disease if there was a 25% chance of causing a serious illness instead. Maybe I am off on my guess though.

It's just an analogy... but still. Seems the outcome is the same. In choosing to have another child, you would be taking a 25% chance in creating a child with CF. Or in giving the hypothetical vaccine, the same 25% chance of creating CF.

It's interesting to me that a lot of the comments seem to touch on that having CF doesn't mean you can't be happy, that we should just leave it up to God, that tragedy could happen to anyone, that we love our kids no matter what disease they might have, etc. Which are all true, but seem to me to be incidental to the question.

I'm curious what the motivation is, for those who said they would choose to have kids, even with the 25% chance. Is it the internal drive to have your own biological kids? Is it that 25% isn't a high enough chance? Is it that you think CF isn't that big of a deal? Honestly, I am curious... why take the chance?"

I'd love to hear your response...you can also see all of the other comments at https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8121963203914214070&postID=1637367927530098130
 

RonnieSharpe

New member
Here's a comment left on my blog responding to my post....What do you guys think? How would you answer?

"Soooo, just to play devil's advocate...

Let's say someone invented a vaccine for something annoying, but fairly harmless... roseola, for instance. But the vaccine also carried a 25% chance of causing CF. (I know that's not medically possible, just a hypothetical.) Would you give it to your newborn? What if there was a 50% chance? 100%?

My guess is that most people wouldn't even consider giving their kid a vaccine for a fairly harmless disease if there was a 25% chance of causing a serious illness instead. Maybe I am off on my guess though.

It's just an analogy... but still. Seems the outcome is the same. In choosing to have another child, you would be taking a 25% chance in creating a child with CF. Or in giving the hypothetical vaccine, the same 25% chance of creating CF.

It's interesting to me that a lot of the comments seem to touch on that having CF doesn't mean you can't be happy, that we should just leave it up to God, that tragedy could happen to anyone, that we love our kids no matter what disease they might have, etc. Which are all true, but seem to me to be incidental to the question.

I'm curious what the motivation is, for those who said they would choose to have kids, even with the 25% chance. Is it the internal drive to have your own biological kids? Is it that 25% isn't a high enough chance? Is it that you think CF isn't that big of a deal? Honestly, I am curious... why take the chance?"

I'd love to hear your response...you can also see all of the other comments at https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8121963203914214070&postID=1637367927530098130
 

RonnieSharpe

New member
Here's a comment left on my blog responding to my post....What do you guys think? How would you answer?

"Soooo, just to play devil's advocate...

Let's say someone invented a vaccine for something annoying, but fairly harmless... roseola, for instance. But the vaccine also carried a 25% chance of causing CF. (I know that's not medically possible, just a hypothetical.) Would you give it to your newborn? What if there was a 50% chance? 100%?

My guess is that most people wouldn't even consider giving their kid a vaccine for a fairly harmless disease if there was a 25% chance of causing a serious illness instead. Maybe I am off on my guess though.

It's just an analogy... but still. Seems the outcome is the same. In choosing to have another child, you would be taking a 25% chance in creating a child with CF. Or in giving the hypothetical vaccine, the same 25% chance of creating CF.

It's interesting to me that a lot of the comments seem to touch on that having CF doesn't mean you can't be happy, that we should just leave it up to God, that tragedy could happen to anyone, that we love our kids no matter what disease they might have, etc. Which are all true, but seem to me to be incidental to the question.

I'm curious what the motivation is, for those who said they would choose to have kids, even with the 25% chance. Is it the internal drive to have your own biological kids? Is it that 25% isn't a high enough chance? Is it that you think CF isn't that big of a deal? Honestly, I am curious... why take the chance?"

I'd love to hear your response...you can also see all of the other comments at https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8121963203914214070&postID=1637367927530098130
 

RonnieSharpe

New member
Here's a comment left on my blog responding to my post....What do you guys think? How would you answer?
<br />
<br />"Soooo, just to play devil's advocate...
<br />
<br />Let's say someone invented a vaccine for something annoying, but fairly harmless... roseola, for instance. But the vaccine also carried a 25% chance of causing CF. (I know that's not medically possible, just a hypothetical.) Would you give it to your newborn? What if there was a 50% chance? 100%?
<br />
<br />My guess is that most people wouldn't even consider giving their kid a vaccine for a fairly harmless disease if there was a 25% chance of causing a serious illness instead. Maybe I am off on my guess though.
<br />
<br />It's just an analogy... but still. Seems the outcome is the same. In choosing to have another child, you would be taking a 25% chance in creating a child with CF. Or in giving the hypothetical vaccine, the same 25% chance of creating CF.
<br />
<br />It's interesting to me that a lot of the comments seem to touch on that having CF doesn't mean you can't be happy, that we should just leave it up to God, that tragedy could happen to anyone, that we love our kids no matter what disease they might have, etc. Which are all true, but seem to me to be incidental to the question.
<br />
<br />I'm curious what the motivation is, for those who said they would choose to have kids, even with the 25% chance. Is it the internal drive to have your own biological kids? Is it that 25% isn't a high enough chance? Is it that you think CF isn't that big of a deal? Honestly, I am curious... why take the chance?"
<br />
<br />I'd love to hear your response...you can also see all of the other comments at https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8121963203914214070&postID=1637367927530098130
 
Top