THIS IS HOW THE BRITISH PRESS RESPONDS TO THE KILLINGS OF DISABLED CHILDREN. All of these extracts were taken from UK news websites. the final tweet is in response to a now-deleted tweet from politician Sandy Kaylan, who praised a mother for ‘euthanising’ her infant children

tania Clarence, 43, admitted to smothering three of her children, all of whom suffered from physical disabilities. Regardless of the circumstances that led to their tragic deaths, these methods of reporting are unethical and go against the British editors code of practice - which states that, once proceedings are active, the press cannot publish any material that could create substantial risk of prejudice in court. The language used in these articles (“tragic mum”, “the unbearable burden of care”, putting the word murder in scare quotes, etc) does exactly that. Reading these articles, it is clear who we are meant to “side” with.

that these rules on court proceedings are apparently not applicable to cases involving the killing of disabled children shows how little the British press (and by extension, the public) cares about the welfare of disabled people in this country. Calling these children burdens and implying they deserved to die reinforces ableism and makes the world a more dangerous place for disabled people. Yet the press does not count it as encouraging prejudice. maybe it’s because we believe the unlawful killing of disabled infants does not “count” as a real crime

This is abhorrent.


The utopia of britain

this is how the media responds to women that murder their children

I’m speechless.

"Tragic mum" I think I’m gonna be sick.

(via catholicamputee)

America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation. The so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships. It has aggravated the derogation of the father’s role in an increasingly fatherless society. It has portrayed the greatest of gifts — a child — as a competitor, an intrusion, and an inconvenience. It has nominally accorded mothers unfettered dominion over the independent lives of their physically dependent sons and daughters. — Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta (via greluc)

(via iamfitzwilliamdarcy)


Today the front boulevard along Parliament Hill in Ottawa was covered with 100,000 pink and blue flags, as a testimony to the approximately 100,000 girls and boys that are denied their right to life every year in Canada from abortion. 

Canada is the only democracy in the entire world that does not have an abortion law.

We Need A Law

(via iamfitzwilliamdarcy)


Heartwarming Kickstarter raises $22K to make clothes for people with Down syndrome 

Downs Designs produces jeans, capri pants and shirts for individuals with Down syndrome, a genetic disorder that leaves patients with developmental delays and intellectual disability. Patients with Down syndrome are physically built differently than other people, and as a result often lack access to well-fitting clothes, furthering negative perceptions of people who have the disorder and increasing the condition’s social stigma.

Why clothing options are so limitedFollow micdotcom

(via fleur-of-lys)


What I actually wanted to say in response to this article about parents undergoing prenatal screening for Down Syndrome justifying their intent to have an abortion if the test came back positive:

All the horrible implications of these statements aside, these parents are expressing what they believe having a child with Down Syndrome will be like. Though all the quotes in the article are about how difficult, undesirable, or “unfair” this situation will be for the parents, it’s also common to hear justifications for aborting babies with Down’s (or other disabilities) based on how much the children themselves will allegedly suffer.

And for the most part, these people aren’t just making excuses. They really believe that a life with Down Syndrome is a life of horrible suffering, and that having a child with Down’s is an unbearable burden.

But, for the most part, these people don’t actually know anyone with Down Syndrome, either.

They may know a lot about Down Syndrome or other disabilities - all the things people with that disability can’t do, all the medical challenges they will face. But they don’t actually know people with these disabilities as people. The disabled child is, in their minds, reduced to the disability.

And when the special education programs intended to help such children keep them largely isolated from their neurotypical, able-bodied peers, is it any wonder?

When people with disabilities are marginalized from infancy, the result is that most members of the mainstream society will never interact with them, therefore they will never get to know them, therefore they will never have the opportunity to develop compassion towards them. It is this marginalization which fosters the attitude that disabled children are nothing but a burden, that their lives are not worth living, that it would be immoral not to kill them before they are born. It is this attitude which leads to 75 to 94 percent of children with Down Syndrome being aborted, depending on the country. This wholesale elimination of children with Down’s in turn increasingly marginalizes the survivors, as their decreased numbers make it even less likely that the average person will ever interact with them. And on the cycle goes.

I believe that the least restrictive environment approach to special education does improve the quality of education that children with disabilities receive. But the inclusion of these children in the mainstream classroom also serves the crucial function of bringing them out of the margins. Only by increasing their interactions with their disabled peers can mainstream children learn compassion towards them, and only by learning compassion can they learn to value the disabled as people.

One of the most horrifying quotes cited in the article, in my opinion, was this:

It’s devastating, it’s a waste, all the love that goes into kids like that.

As if loving a child could ever be a waste.


See the whole thing here.

A reader sent this in to me yesterday:

I was recently sexually assaulted and had no idea what I was supposed to do(that I had to go to the ER and call the police). I think it would be great if you made a post telling and informing people of what will happen and what they need to do about it. I would’ve been a lot less scared if I would’ve known.

I wish I had been able to do something about that for that reader, but hopefully this will help others.

(via heartlessmuffineater)

When the baby boomers put themselves and their children on the pill faster than they could say “birds and bees,” we inherited both the logic and the mindlessness of the pill. People invert the right not to have a child and conclude that there is also a right to have a child. The result is a marketplace for the commoditized human being. Disposable when unwanted, purchasable when desired. Journey to Baby Gammy: How We Justify a Market in Children