This illustrates why legislation surrounding the delivery of a prenatal Down syndrome diagnosis is so important. A prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome comes with shock, as the expectations and assumptions of expecting parents are overturned. When you don’t know the person yet, the child can get lost under the diagnosis.The time, support and information given to this couple made such a difference in their experience when they received a prenatal diagnosis halfway through their pregnancy. 

This story was generously shared with us by Will & Christina Dokter after they participated in a campaign started by the Down Syndrome Association of Ontario (DSAO). The DSAO is advocating for legislation that would give support and current information to parents faced with a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome. It would also prevent a physician from recommending any medical procedure that perpetuates a negative stereotype of Down syndrome.

If you are an Ontario resident with a connection to the Down syndrome community, consider participating in this campaign by going here.

__________________________________________________________________________

We discovered that our baby boy had a heart defect at his 20-week ultrasound.  We were offered non-invasive testing for Down syndrome, which we accepted.  The results told us that our son had a 91% chance of being born with Down syndrome. This news was delivered in a neutral tone, with no apology or negativity. We met with the geneticist in London, Ontario, and she was lovely. She told us our son would do everything that typical kids do, just in his own time. She gave us resources and connected us with the local Down syndrome support group.  We were told that we had the option to abort, but it was never pushed or even encouraged. We rejected that option immediately and it was never brought up again.

Despite the fact that we are staunchly pro-life, that we believe God has a purpose and a plan, that we loved our unborn son, and that we were connected with support, it was still a scary and stressful time.  I had to accept the diagnosis before I was ready to accept the support that came with it. That took a bit of time, and for parents who are scared and vulnerable, a negative word from their doctor is tremendously powerful. I am amazed and appalled at some of the stories I’ve encountered online where parents have to fight to defend the value of their child constantly.

Once I was ready to reach out for help, other parents of little ones with Down syndrome were amazing. They were kind, encouraging and supportive, and they unanimously shared unqualified joy and delight in their special kids. I began to see that having a child with special needs is, in fact, a rare gift. Our son has opened up our eyes to things we didn’t know or see or experience before. He’s teaching his siblings empathy, joy, acceptance, appreciation for small accomplishments, thankfulness, and many other precious things.

He has been an expensive child, from a taxpayer’s perspective. He spent a week in the NICU at birth, 8 days in SickKids having his heart repaired at 5 months, endless weeks in the pediatric critical care unit dealing with complications that arose after his heart repair, and many other tests and appointments. He receives publicly funded therapy weekly, and is on a couple long-term medications which are covered as well. He will need support for the foreseeable future.  Perhaps this is one driving force behind the push to terminate these little ones – financially, they’re hard on the system.

But the question is, who determines the value of a life?  Do we only get to live if we tip the financial scales the right way?  Is this what society is saying?  Is it what they want to say?

Our son James is a fully human being, made in the image of God. His life is indescribably valuable. If he were not here, we would have lost the opportunity to learn so many things that only he could teach us. Experiencing life with an extra special person is to be enrolled in a school like no other.

People in the Down syndrome community are the first victims of the current state of affairs, but it is actually all of society that will lose if this continues. The value of human life cannot be measured on contributions, or on chromosomes. Thankfully, our story was one of support and encouragement to parent this child we were given. We want every family given an unexpected prenatal diagnosis to have that same experience.

According to the Cambridge Times, the measure protects patients’ right to access care and at the same time ensures that doctors meet their legal obligations under the Ontario Human Rights Code. The president of the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, Dr. Carol Leet, said that physicians who do not comply with the new policy could face repercussions ranging from a requirement to upgrade their education to revocation of their medical licenses, depending on the seriousness of the situation. She said, “There have been some complaints about access to care.”

Leet said that the old policy stipulated that physicians did not have to provide services that conflicted with their personal values and beliefs, but it was non-specific about whether they should make referrals to other doctors.

Currently, 16,000 people have opposed the new policy but that hasn’t changed the CPSO’s decision.

Read more at LifeNews.com

Dear Dr. Marc Gabel,

I just read this article which was published in the Catholic Register. You were quoted in the piece. Here is an excerpt:

Catholic doctors who won’t perform abortions or provide abortion referrals should leave family medicine, says an official of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

“It may well be that you would have to think about whether you can practice family medicine as it is defined in Canada and in most of the Western countries,” said Dr. Marc Gabel, chair of the college’s policy working group reviewing “Professional Obligations and Human Rights.”

The Ontario doctor’s organization released a draft policy Dec. 11 that would require all doctors to provide referrals for abortions, morning-after pills and contraception. The revised policy is in response to evolving obligations under the Ontario Human Rights Code, Gabel said.

There have been no Ontario Human Rights Tribunal decisions against doctors for failing to refer for abortion or contraception.

Gabel said there’s plenty of room for conscientious Catholics in various medical specialties, but a moral objection to abortion and contraception will put family doctors on the wrong side of human rights legislation and current professional practice.

“Medicine is an amazingly wide profession with many, many areas to practice medicine,” he said.

Yes, medicine is “an amazingly wide profession.” Thankfully, it is also a profession which attracts an “amazingly wide” array of Canadians. Of those Canadian physicians are some who share my pro-life perspective. They may refuse to refer for abortion due to their conscience, but they may also refuse to refer due to their religious beliefs (or both – we’re working out what this means under the Charter). They may be Christian, Muslim, Jewish or atheist physicians but they have an issue with abortion or contraceptives. For them, to refer for this procedure or these drugs is to be complicit in the actions and their consequences.

I am an Ontario resident. I’m a cancer survivor. I’m a mother.  I have spent far more than my fair share of time in Ontario hospitals and clinics being treated by wonderful Ontario doctors.

Over the last few years, I’ve gone out of my way to work with pro-life physicians who share my perspective. I reject the notion that killing and dismembering unborn children is medicine, and I wanted to work with physicians who share my values regarding human life and human dignity.  Due to the “amazingly wide” practice of medicine in Ontario, I was able to find a few, and become their patient. I am so thankful for their care.

But due to your working group’s proposed new policy, I might lose my family physicians. They will choose to practice medicine in a province that respects both their skills and their rights, rather than sacrifice their conscience or their sincerely held religious beliefs.

I’m also a human rights lawyer. The College’s reasoning for stripping physicians of their conscience and religious rights is not based on law. Your working group received a number of submissions on that point, so I’ll leave you to review them with your legal counsel. The doctors seeking to exercise their freedoms have a leg to stand on. Heck, they have Canadian and Ontario human rights law on their side.

Of great concern to me is the definition of “discrimination” which you provided when interviewed:

“We’re saying that the discrimination occurs when you are not acting in the best interest of the patient,” said Gabel. “When you are not communicating effectively or respectfully about this with the patient, when you’re not managing conflicts, when you differ from the patient and when you are not respecting the patient’s dignity and ensuring their access to care and protecting their safety. That’s the issue.”

Dr. Gabel, this is not the definition of “discrimination” at law. If someone chooses to make up definitions for words, they are free to do so. (My son, for example, seems to think that “babagaba” is a verb which means “to chew on mommy’s ankle.”)

However, for a body like the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario to create a new definition of “discrimination” which will result in the stripping of legal and human rights of some of their members is shocking, and this new definition will not stand up in a court of law. I urge the College to abide by Canadian and Ontario law.

Dr. Gabel, I suspect you are well intentioned and a kind and caring psychotherapist, like so many of the wonderful doctors who have treated me over the years. But please don’t force my physicians from the province with your policy. My family depends on their expertise and professionalism. I like to see my own values reflected in the “amazingly wide” practice of medicine in Ontario. For someone like myself, a religious minority, this is very important.

The membership of your College is broad and wide enough to include some family physicians who happen to hold pro-life positions. If it is not, it should be.

Sincerely,

Faye Sonier

Note: Faye Sonier is a human rights lawyer and a contributor to the ProWomanProLife.org project.

Kate Desjardins, a 25-year-old from Ottawa entered a walk-in clinic earlier this year to have her birth control prescription renewed. Except this was not a routine visit, as Ms. Desjardins quickly found out that the doctor on duty did not prescribe contraceptives.

These two experiences have resulted in a renewed debate over conscience protection for doctors.

Dr. Margaret Somerville, Director of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law debates Arthur Schafer, director of the Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba on the question, “Should doctors have the right to refuse to prescribe birth control because of their religious beliefs?”  The question should really be, “Should patients have the right to a medical procedure from any physician of their choosing?”

Anyway, Dr. Somerville does a remarkable job at focusing the debate and responds very well to Mr. Schafer in the radio debate. Here is one statement,

“We have a right to freedom of conscience and freedom of belief, and for a physician who believes that contraception is unethical and not morally acceptable, and possibly has religious beliefs or those beliefs might be grounded in his religion or they might not be, than if he prescribes contraceptions than he’s complicit in the action he believes is unethical and immoral.”

You can listen to the thirteen minute interview here.

When my husband and I got married, we were told that we probably would never naturally conceive a child. It was possible, but the chances were slim. My husband was diagnosed with a rare condition called MEN 2B, which caused cancer to grow in his body. This impacted many things, including his ability to have children.

Contrary to what the doctors told us, God blessed us with not only one, but two children.

And here is where it gets tricky.

Colin’s condition is hereditary. Any children we have will have a 50% chance of inheriting this horrible condition.

When I was pregnant with our first, I was told that a test could be administered to see if the gene had been inherited. The medical staff were confused when I declined, stating that no matter what, I was having this baby. When she was born, the tests came back positive. Our first child had MEN 2B.

From the medical community, and from many people who found this out, I heard mumbling and shock that I would knowingly have a baby like this.

When I found out I was pregnant again, the same tests were offered, and refused. Then my husband became sick. Really sick.

The tests were offered again. Again, I refused them. When it became clear that my husband was not going to make it, I was told that it was not too late – that there were places that could still help me make my decision on the baby. At this point, I was 28 weeks pregnant.

We need a law. If we had a law, I wouldn’t have gone through the most difficult part of my life (my husband’s funeral) with people hinting, and sometimes outright saying, that there was another choice than having my baby.

We need a law. If there was a law, I wouldn’t hear muttered words about the ways I could have avoided this every time I end up in the hospital with my oldest.

We need a law. If there was a law, people wouldn’t try to make me feel horrible for bringing my two wonderful blessings into the world.

Every parent of a child with Down’s syndrome, with Spina Bifida, with MEN 2B, with any genetic illness will tell you that their child is special, that their child is a blessing, or that their child is normal but for the illness.

But doctors, nurses, and the general public don’t see this. They see children that should not be here when there was another option before birth. They see little nuisances that take up resources that could mean an easier shift.

We need a law.

Every child is important, even those who have diseases.

Every parent deserves to have care given to their child, without feeling the judgement that they allowed this child to be born.

We need a law.