> It's an arbitrary choice made on the foundations of very shaky knowledge. Nothing about down syndrome, autism or gender qualifies as "very shaky knowledge".

> It's an arbitrary choice made on the foundations of very shaky knowledge. Nothing about down syndrome, autism or gender qualifies as "very shaky knowledge". It's the woman's choice. It's her body and she has the right to abort for whatever reason she wants. > There's legitimate reasons to terminate a pregnancy that are completely unrelated to trying to screen for a "normal" kid. The only legitimate reason is the woman doesn't want to carry the pregnancy to term. If it is wrong to abort an autistic baby, then all abortions are wrong. Think about it. > But this study does not appear to be coming from a good place, or a place of genuine understanding. A good place? You get to decide? If you want an autistic kid, you have one. And if another person doesn't want one, they don't have to have one? What ever happened to the choice in pro-choice?