This weekend our parish hosted its annual stewardship fair in which all the various ministries advertise themselves so that more people will participate in the groups as well as volunteer. I founded the St. Gerard's ministry at our parish, which organizes volunteers to cook and take meals to women who have just given birth (or are on bed rest or other similar situations).
But there is only so much to say about bringing meals to mothers, so I took the opportunity to advertise two diocesan-wide ministries (but not based out of our parish) much beloved to me: Elizabeth Ministry and Be Not Afraid.
Elizabeth Ministry is a bereavement ministry for families that have lost a baby through miscarriage or stillbirth.
Be Not Afraid is a ministry that encourages and supports families to carry to term babies with a poor prenatal diagnosis (whether a disability or a diagnosis that is "incompatible with life"). The pressure from the obstetrics industry--not every OB, of course, but the profession in general--to have these babies aborted is almost unreal and I could share horrific anecdotes illustrating that. I'll take one opportunity to make the public service announcement that the AFP screening test during pregnancy (to check for fetal abnormalities) has approximately a 97% inaccuracy rate (of false positives for abnormalities). Why does the obstetric industry tolerate a test that is wrong 97% of the time? Because at least if it is inaccurate in saying that something might be wrong with the baby, the OB cannot later be served with a wrongful birth or wrongful life suit because "I told you something might be wrong with your baby." (And who can blame them for not wanting their careers ruined by such a lawsuit?) I seriously doubt the industry would tolerate a test that missed 97% of fetal abnormalities. And since virtually no fetal abnormalities can be treated or corrected during pregnancy, why is there so much emphasis from the obstetricians to test for them? There is only one thing that can be done in the face of a poor prenatal diagnosis. And there are so many misdiagnoses of fetal problems. There was a study done in 2000 of autopsies of 100 babies who had been aborted because of poor prenatal diagnosis: 39 had something "wrong" with them and 61 of them were "perfect." Let those numbers sink in. We don't support organizations like the March of Dimes because its goal to eradicate childhood disabilities is achieved through prenatal testing and abortion of children with disabilities. If that is not eugenics, I do not know what is.
You'll note in the photos that I had on display burial gowns for teeny tiny babies: the silk "purse" for babies in the first trimester, a tiny boy's gown for a second-trimester baby, and a girl's gown for a third-trimester loss. These were all made by Mary Madeline ministry, which uses old wedding gowns and prom dresses to make burial gowns for lost babies.
I was very pleased to have the opportunity to spread knowledge about these two ministries among my fellow parishioners.
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! As someone who recently experienced a miscarriage (in Dec), I would love to look into the ministry you promoted. Also, I would like to say something about the "Do not be afraid" one.... When I was 20wks pregnant in my first pregnancy the drs noticed some 'abnormalities' in our ultrasound. Before they even asked about further testing, my doctor suggested 'termination'. Since abortion was never an option for us, we decided to decline amnio or the other invasive testing. We did have ultrasounds once a month for the rest of the pregnancy. Each time the high risk doctors told us that things looked the same, that our child would more than likely have some sort of mental disability. They never gave us a shred of hope that he would be okay. Our son was born 8 days late, at 8lbs 14ozs., and 100% healthy. He'll be 3 in a week and has only been really sick once in his life. Would we have loved him had he been born with a disability, of course. But, my son is an example of a healthy child that might have been aborted if he'd had a different mother. And then I've heard of two stories lately of women who've had children born with down's syndrome and there were NO indication on the ultrasounds or other testing they had. May God be blessed by ALL our children!!!
ReplyDeleteAnna: I'm so sorry to hear about your recent loss. Thank you for sharing your story! And look at all that worry and uncertainty you had to endure during your pregnancy that came to naught. Praise God that those two women whose children had undetected Down Syndrome. I mean, maybe they were pro-life women, I don't know, but approximately 90% of babies diagnosied with DS are aborted in this country so those are bad odds.
ReplyDeleteThat is good to know about the March of Dimes! Had no idea.
ReplyDeleteI just have to say that Anna's story in your comments really struck a chord with me. We opted against the AFP and other prenatal tests because of the false positives. I couldn't ever abort a child, and I didn't want to have to face what Anna went through, thinking I *might* have a child with special needs when really, there's very little way to tell for sure until the baby is born. Anna, my heart goes out to you for your recent miscarriage, but I am *so* happy to hear about your healthy, wonderful little boy!
ReplyDeleteBecause I'm already 36 and thus "geriatric" in the pregnancy world, I know we'll be pressured with "you need to do x, y, and z tests" if we have another child. And again, I will be declining those tests, for the same reasons I did the first time. They just scare me...
Sarah: I wanted to provide you with more than my word (not that you were expressing doubt) so I did a quick Google search and this came up first. Number 3 on the list is particularly chilling:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lifeissues.org/marchofdimes/sue_enouen_7-09.htm
And just so people know, I'm not expressing a stance that all prenatal testing is evil, just that we as mothers should know its purpose, the risks and benefits, and go in with eyes wide open. If we had an ultrasound that revealed soft markers for Down Syndrome, what is the purpose of getting further testing? It would be really nice to know for sure, for curiosity's sake, but one must weigh that amniocentisis has a 1 in 200 chance of causing a miscarriage and CVS has a 1 in 100 chance of the same.
ReplyDeletePersonally, since we are a home birthing family, I do get the 20-week ultrasound because it's important to me to know that the baby doesn't have any serious medical problems that would require hospital care immediately upon birth. For example, if my baby has spina bifida, it's important to know that, not because I'm going to abort him, but because he should be born in a hospital where he can put into a sterile field immediately and go into surgery to save his life.
I wish more parishes offered these ministries! Definitely something I would like to pursue when life settles down for us.
ReplyDeleteI had a pro-life (but subtly since it wasn't a Christian practice) midwife with DS2 and I remember her firmly nodding her head when I declined prenatal testing and saying, "We're having a baby." I loved her! (Not the rest of the practice, but she was wonderful!)
I just declined AFP testing this week as well... ;-)
Katherine,
ReplyDeleteDoes the March of Dimes actually say that in their literature?? Yeesh!!! It is so sad that we have to be so careful where we put our money! People don't understand..how could we not support breast cancer research, Parkinson's research, childhood illnesses etc etc. It is so sneaky and evil!!!
As you know I "failed" the AFP and Ben is perfect and all the test did for me was make me more of a basketcase than I already was. Feel free to use me as an example when sharing info!
Looks like you did a great job and I hope there was a lot of interest in these ministries!
It's sad to know that the number of babies diagnosed with DS has gone up in recent years, while the babies born with DS has gone down.
ReplyDeleteI do agree, that it is a comfort to 'know'. After our ultrasound, we read everything we could find on the two possible disorders our son might have had. Practically speaking, we felt prepared to have a child with a disability.
What a neat ministry! I love it.
ReplyDeleteWhile I refuse to have any sort of "triple screen"/amnio/CVS type testing, I have indeed have had the AFP for both pregnancies. Not that the results would sway us to abort should there be an unfavorable result...and fortunately, both times showed nothing wrong, our thinking behind having it done it so we could be prepared for any possible disabilities.
As you know, when I was pregnant with Emma, her 20-week US showed bilateral club foot. The perinatologist asked if we had the AFP done, because club foot often accompanies spina bifida...we had a clear AFP. Once we learned of Emma's foot condition, we did SOOOO much research on treatments and therapies and such (something we would do if any other disability was present...we like to be well informed and prepared). At her birth, we had a good sized team of specialists on hand to check her out, "just in case." Fortunately, she was VERY healthy...just had a crooked little foot!
At 6 days old, we took her to a pediatric orthopedic surgeon, and he diagnosed her with vertical tallus instead of club foot. Interestingly enough, vertical tallus often accompanies down syndrome!
While I know some people misuse a lot of these prenatal tests, and they can often cause more stress than necessary, I've had favorable outcomes with mine.
Jamie: I remember how you were worried for the remainder of the pregnancy with Ben! That's one of the troubles for a pro-life mother: if one gets the AFP and it comes back "positive," but then one isn't willing to risk miscarriage with the amniocentisis or CVS, then the poor mother is left just to worry and not know for months! So much stress!
ReplyDeleteJaneane: I remember how Emma was diagnosed with club foot! Definitely it was nice to have done the research ahead of time instead of trying to manage it with a newborn, especially since the treatments were the kind of thing best done immediately. In your case it worked out well. And then I think of the families who abort their babies for something as simple and fixable as club foot--it really is pushed on them and it really does happen. :*( Just to be clear, I'm not saying these prenatal tests should be outlawed or are evil, just that women would benefit from more education about them so they can go in with their eyes wide open.
ReplyDeleteThank you for promoting these ministries. The pressure to do an amnio is so intense from the docs. They will scare you and pressure you in ways you cannot imagine (such as: let's do the amnio today- I have space in 10 mins). If you are not strong in your faith, you will easily cave. Further, while I am overjoyed to hear of the women who were told their babies had something wrong with them yet they went on to have healthy babies, I have to say that not all of us are so lucky. Remember that many of us simply choose to carry for as long as we can.
ReplyDeleteOur little Sophie had IUGR (growth restriction) and hydrocephalus. We don't know why she had it, and we obviously prayed and prayed for healing. We were prepared for intense medical care upon birth, but as things turned out she did not make it to term. We did lose her, and it was so very hard. We are thankful for the time we had with her. This is where Be Not Afraid is so important. BNA supports parents carrying to term when they know the outcome is not going to be good- likely they are carrying babies that will die at birth or shortly after. The hardest part is that some OBs will just stop caring for the women who are carrying to term in a situation like that. It is truly a nightmare.
Thank you again for promoting Elizabeth Ministry, Be Not Afraid and St. Gerards' Ministries. They are all so vitally important.
I completely agree with you there Katherine! I have a friend who doesn't question anything her doctors say and will get every test imaginable...and then rather than doing the research herself and making her own decisions, she goes with what the doc suggests. She had an abnormal triple screen (which gave her something like a .3% chance of having a baby with DS), so she had the CVS done, and I was really worried what decision she was going to make had that come back unfavorable... A .3% "risk" factor, and she did the CVS!
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to share my positive experience with prenatal testing and how it can be used favorably. But I certainly have issues with how they can be used to frighten and persuade.