Roe v Wade is on deck

[Elixir]

Except the babies that would otherwise be killed, of course.

Name one.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

medically justified abortions for the last trimester.

That’s what I said.
Jump through legal hoops to obtain healthcare in the 3rd.

* benefits NOBODY

Except the babies that would otherwise be killed, of course.

* makes a handy platform for controlling and harming women

QED.

i don’t know why you want to re-litigate this stupidity.

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions without any medical justification, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of women don't support them.

Are men really arguing so vociferously for third-term abortions? The men I see arguing "vociferously" are the ones standing on sidewalks in front of the Reproductive Health Clinic... and it isn't in support of third-term abortions.

 

[Elixir]

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions

It is disgustingly disingenuous of you to construe that I am “for” abortion whatsoever.
I have had to endure it with my partner multiple times. Her life has been under threat from pregnancy Has yours?
Are you some self appointed authority on people’s motivations for abortion? Or are you content to let the goddam trumpsucking courts decide while people bleed out in hospital parking lots?
Your hypocrisy can attempt to hide behind a wall of insults, but it is a thin disguise.

I AM ARGUING AGAINST ABORTION BANS. Including late term ones.
Give me your argument FOR them or STFU.*
“I already did”, isn’t an argument btw.
So far all we got is your willingness to elevate the rights of fetuses over those of people upon whom the fetus depends.

* Please include statistics

 

[Emily Lake]

medically justified abortions for the last trimester.

That’s what I said.
Jump through legal hoops to obtain healthcare in the 3rd.

* benefits NOBODY

Except the babies that would otherwise be killed, of course.

* makes a handy platform for controlling and harming women

QED.

i don’t know why you want to re-litigate this stupidity.

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions without any medical justification, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of women don't support them.

Are men really arguing so vociferously for third-term abortions? The men I see arguing "vociferously" are the ones standing on sidewalks in front of the Reproductive Health Clinic... and it isn't in support of third-term abortions.

Looking around IIDB... yes, it's MEN doing the vociferous arguing that abortion should be completely unlimited and unfettered at any point during a pregnancy right up until the baby is delivered.

At some point in the process, it's not a zygote anymore, it's a fetus. At another point, it's no longer a fetus and becomes a baby. We can squabble about exactly when that point is... but it's a reasonable generality that during that last trimester, it's pretty much a baby. I know it seems completely bonkers to you that anyone would ever be opposed to killing babies unless there was a very good reason for doing so, but well, here I am: I oppose killing babies unless there's a really good reason for it.

Seriously, why is it so difficult for you guys to grasp that I am still fully supportive of late term abortions when there's a really good reason for it?

 

[Emily Lake]

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions

It is disgustingly disingenuous of you to construe that I am “for” abortion whatsoever.
I have had to endure it with my partner multiple times. Her life has been under threat from pregnancy Has yours?

IF HER LIFE IS UNDER THREAT THEN BY ALL MEANS TERMINATE THE PREGNANCY!
I have never ever ever suggested that a threat to the mother's health should be ignored, I've said it so many times that your failure to understand it is completely on you and you alone.

Are you some self appointed authority on people’s motivations for abortion? Or are you content to let the goddam trumpsucking courts decide while people bleed out in hospital parking lots?
Your hypocrisy can attempt to hide behind a wall of insults, but it is a thin disguise.

I AM ARGUING AGAINST ABORTION BANS. Including late term ones.
Give me your argument FOR them or STFU.*
“I already did”, isn’t an argument btw.
So far all we got is your willingness to elevate the rights of fetuses over those of people upon whom the fetus depends.

* Please include statistics

Why should I bother going through this with you again? WE've been through it all before, I provided support already, and I'm tired of this game. It doesn't matter, because no matter what I say, how clearly I say it, or how entirely reasonable it is and how much this is the preferred position of the overwhelming number of women.. you're just going to lie about it in the future and pretend like I support a complete ban when I never have, not once, not ever. So how about you just stop fucking lying and act like a grown up?

 

[Elixir]

Looking around IIDB... yes, it's MEN doing the vociferous arguing that abortion should be completely unlimited

Is that the same as “arguing for abortion”?
Why bring it up?

WE've been through it all before, I provided support already

I knew you would assert that.
And predicted it with my advice above.
What part if you not understand?

I AM ARGUING AGAINST ABORTION BANS. Including late term ones.
My argument is simple - it hurts people and doesn’t help people.

Give me your argument FOR them or STFU.*
“I already did”, isn’t an argument btw.
So far all we got is your willingness to elevate the rights of fetuses over those of people upon whom the fetus depends.

* Please include statistics

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

medically justified abortions for the last trimester.

That’s what I said.
Jump through legal hoops to obtain healthcare in the 3rd.

* benefits NOBODY

Except the babies that would otherwise be killed, of course.

* makes a handy platform for controlling and harming women

QED.

i don’t know why you want to re-litigate this stupidity.

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions without any medical justification, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of women don't support them.

Are men really arguing so vociferously for third-term abortions? The men I see arguing "vociferously" are the ones standing on sidewalks in front of the Reproductive Health Clinic... and it isn't in support of third-term abortions.

Looking around IIDB... yes, it's MEN doing the vociferous arguing that abortion should be completely unlimited and unfettered at any point during a pregnancy right up until the baby is delivered.

*looks around*

I mean yes, we think highly of Elixir here, but are we going to count Elixir as "men"? Is this a new identity thing, where individuals can be considered groups of people? I'm getting so behind the times.

At some point in the process, it's not a zygote anymore, it's a fetus. At another point, it's no longer a fetus and becomes a baby. We can squabble about exactly when that point is... but it's a reasonable generality that during that last trimester, it's pretty much a baby.

Or an unviable fetus. You are putting effort in here, into a situation that wasn't common. Arbitrary abortions in the third trimester is going to be very hard to find a doctor to perform. And even less likely to see a woman want to go through. It was a strawman when the GOP waged a war against it and passed legislation to stop it.

Most people believe it isn't morally acceptable to arbitrarily perform that procedure at such a late period of time. The procedures almost exclusively involve a sobbing expectant mother who is entering the trauma of having lost her child. I know it seems completely bonkers to you that anyone would ever be opposed to letting a woman and her board licensed doctor to make what will be the hardest decision of the woman's life amongst themselves and not require politicians to get involved to determine if the fetus is unviable enough. But, some people apparently think it is important enough to interject bare hypotheticals in order to justify the government intruding into the life of a woman.

I know, right?! It takes all types!

 

[GenesisNemesis]

At some point in the process, a woman bleeds out in a parking lot.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions

It is disgustingly disingenuous of you to construe that I am “for” abortion whatsoever.
I have had to endure it with my partner multiple times. Her life has been under threat from pregnancy Has yours?

IF HER LIFE IS UNDER THREAT THEN BY ALL MEANS TERMINATE THE PREGNANCY!

if I am understanding Elixir correctly then the point is the woman should just be able to do that, not have to convince a lawyer/judge that she should be able to do that, which is what would happen if a ban were in place (even one with an exception for her in place). And that in some cases could put undue hardship on her, depending on the state she’s in and what kind of judges they have in that state.

Maybe I am misunderstanding Elixir. don’t know. But even lately there have been cases of women not getting or encointering potentially harming delays in the treatment they deserve because doctors fear making the case that these cases fit the exception.

but then again I am man so maybe my opinion doesn’t matter to you on this subject.

 

[Elixir]

I mean yes, we think highly of Elixir here,

You're too kind. Or missing that sarcasm emoji again...

but are we going to count Elixir as "men"?

It's not the first time Ems has re-phrased an ad hom to generalize it.

Is this a new identity thing, where individuals can be considered groups of people? I'm getting so behind the times.

Aren't we all? I thought Americans favored democracy, liberty... that sort of thing. Turns out they worship billionaires.

IF HER LIFE IS UNDER THREAT THEN BY ALL MEANS TERMINATE THE PREGNANCY!

Funny how when you're okay with it, it is "terminate the pregnancy" and otherwise it's "kill the fetus".

Right. Let's call the congresscritter and see if they can get someone over here to check it out and see if they agree that the threat to the mother (which is ALWAYS elevated above baseline in a third trimester pregnancy) is sufficiently existential, her death sufficiently imminent, to allow us to terminate the pregnancy. Meanwhile let's hope she lives that long...

Sorry Ems, I'm sure you think you are well intended, but no - those laws hurt people and don't help people.
I might be okay with your laws if doctors were explicitly held harmless for decisions regarding abortions regardless of ourcomes or extenuations. That way they would at least be free to make decisions based on their medical expertise instead of retaining their license to practice. But it would render your law meaningless. The threat would not be there, which is what such laws are created for.

 

[Emily Lake]

Looking around IIDB... yes, it's MEN doing the vociferous arguing that abortion should be completely unlimited

Is that the same as “arguing for abortion”?
Why bring it up?

YOU brought it up, Elixir, not me. YOU.

WE've been through it all before, I provided support already

I knew you would assert that.
And predicted it with my advice above.
What part if you not understand?

I AM ARGUING AGAINST ABORTION BANS. Including late term ones.
My argument is simple - it hurts people and doesn’t help people.

Nope, doesn't hurt those babies at all, right? Of course, they're not actually "people" until they're all the way out of the womb, so as long as you kill them before you pull them out, no biggie for you. You're fine with that.

Give me your argument FOR them or STFU.*

“I already did”, isn’t an argument btw.
So far all we got is your willingness to elevate the rights of fetuses over those of people upon whom the fetus depends.

* Please include statistics

I'm not going to play your stupid game. Just be aware that your misrepresentations are transparent. I've given you the same goddamned info on multiple occasions, as have other posters. You ignored it then, and you'll ignore it this time too.

Why on earth do you think you're important enough to me that I'd kowtow to your infantile demands, just to counter the same misinformation that you've trotted out over and over?

 

[Emily Lake]

medically justified abortions for the last trimester.

That’s what I said.
Jump through legal hoops to obtain healthcare in the 3rd.

* benefits NOBODY

Except the babies that would otherwise be killed, of course.

* makes a handy platform for controlling and harming women

QED.

i don’t know why you want to re-litigate this stupidity.

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions without any medical justification, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of women don't support them.

Are men really arguing so vociferously for third-term abortions? The men I see arguing "vociferously" are the ones standing on sidewalks in front of the Reproductive Health Clinic... and it isn't in support of third-term abortions.

Looking around IIDB... yes, it's MEN doing the vociferous arguing that abortion should be completely unlimited and unfettered at any point during a pregnancy right up until the baby is delivered.

*looks around*

I mean yes, we think highly of Elixir here, but are we going to count Elixir as "men"? Is this a new identity thing, where individuals can be considered groups of people? I'm getting so behind the times.

Elixir hasn't been alone in this.

At some point in the process, it's not a zygote anymore, it's a fetus. At another point, it's no longer a fetus and becomes a baby. We can squabble about exactly when that point is... but it's a reasonable generality that during that last trimester, it's pretty much a baby.

Or an unviable fetus. You are putting effort in here, into a situation that wasn't common. Arbitrary abortions in the third trimester is going to be very hard to find a doctor to perform. And even less likely to see a woman want to go through. It was a strawman when the GOP waged a war against it and passed legislation to stop it.

Most people believe it isn't morally acceptable to arbitrarily perform that procedure at such a late period of time. The procedures almost exclusively involve a sobbing expectant mother who is entering the trauma of having lost her child. I know it seems completely bonkers to you that anyone would ever be opposed to letting a woman and her board licensed doctor to make what will be the hardest decision of the woman's life amongst themselves and not require politicians to get involved to determine if the fetus is unviable enough. But, some people apparently think it is important enough to interject bare hypotheticals in order to justify the government intruding into the life of a woman.

I know, right?! It takes all types!

*Sigh* And here's where I get really irritated.

MEDICALLY JUSTIFIED covers a whole lot. Like, it completely covers your unviable infant situation. And it also covers risks to the mother's health or life, severe disabilities, unforseen deleterious genetic conditions, and pretty much anything that has a medical component to it. I'm literally precluding the situation you yourself identify as being morally unacceptable.

And I've been so incredibly clear about absolutely no barriers in the third trimester for any medically justifiable reason that I can't possibly be any clearer about it.

I absolutely stand by my position that at some point it stops being a fetus and starts being a baby, and that I do NOT support killing a baby unless there's a really good medical reason to do so.

The fact that Elixir and apparently you can't wrap your head around the massive exception that I've already very happily conceded, and keep pretending like I'm somehow supportive of controlling women and forcing them to die in delivery is astonishing.

 

[Emily Lake]

At some point in the process, a woman bleeds out in a parking lot.

This is the dumbest fucking rejoinder.

If the life of the mother is in any way endangered, if her health is at risk, if the infant is unviable, if the infant has a severe deformation or condition that will cause lifelong problems, and any number of other possible medically justifiable situations arises, then by all means I completely support termination in the last trimester.

Seriously, the fact that the ONLY argument you and Elixir and others keep trotting out is one I've already granted as an exception rather demonstrates that you're not using your brains about this one bit. Use your brain.

 

[Emily Lake]

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions

It is disgustingly disingenuous of you to construe that I am “for” abortion whatsoever.
I have had to endure it with my partner multiple times. Her life has been under threat from pregnancy Has yours?

IF HER LIFE IS UNDER THREAT THEN BY ALL MEANS TERMINATE THE PREGNANCY!

if I am understanding Elixir correctly then the point is the woman should just be able to do that, not have to convince a lawyer/judge that she should be able to do that, which is what would happen if a ban were in place (even one with an exception for her in place). And that in some cases could put undue hardship on her, depending on the state she’s in and what kind of judges they have in that state.

Maybe I am misunderstanding Elixir. don’t know. But even lately there have been cases of women not getting or encointering potentially harming delays in the treatment they deserve because doctors fear making the case that these cases fit the exception.

but then again I am man so maybe my opinion doesn’t matter to you on this subject.

Nobody needs to convince a lawyer or judge, and certainly not ahead of time. That's why it's not a fucking ban!

JFC. What I want is exactly what was in place for almost all of my life, what was in place under Roe v. Wade. That didn't result in tons of women bleeding out in parking lots, nor in them having to get special dispensation from a judge ahead of time, nor any of the other "omg sky is falling" scenarios that keep getting trotted out as an argument against reinstating RvW!

 

[Emily Lake]

Funny how when you're okay with it, it is "terminate the pregnancy" and otherwise it's "kill the fetus".

Not funny at all. Because there's a really big difference here. And when there's nothing at all wrong with the infant, nor with the mother, and there's no risk to either of them... then it's actually killing a baby.

This isn't a hard concept. When the dog has rabies, or has a severe illness or injury that can't reasonably be recovered from, then it's "putting them down" or "euthanasia". On the other hand, if someone just decides they don't want that dog anymore, then it's killing a pet.

 

[Emily Lake]

Sorry Ems, I'm sure you think you are well intended, but no - those laws hurt people and don't help people.

All those women who were so terribly terribly hurt and abused and dying in droves under Roe v Wade. Yep. Totally.

I might be okay with your laws if doctors were explicitly held harmless for decisions regarding abortions regardless of ourcomes or extenuations. That way they would at least be free to make decisions based on their medical expertise instead of retaining their license to practice. But it would render your law meaningless. The threat would not be there, which is what such laws are created for.

Why are you adding a shit-ton of things to my positions without bothering to consult me first? At what fucking point have I EVER in any way at all suggested that doctors be held liable? Or that women have to get permission from a judge first? These are all things that you have invented out of whole cloth.

Stop making shit up and you'd have a lot less to argue about, I guess?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

medically justified abortions for the last trimester.

That’s what I said.
Jump through legal hoops to obtain healthcare in the 3rd.

* benefits NOBODY

Except the babies that would otherwise be killed, of course.

* makes a handy platform for controlling and harming women

QED.

i don’t know why you want to re-litigate this stupidity.

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions without any medical justification, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of women don't support them.

Are men really arguing so vociferously for third-term abortions? The men I see arguing "vociferously" are the ones standing on sidewalks in front of the Reproductive Health Clinic... and it isn't in support of third-term abortions.

Looking around IIDB... yes, it's MEN doing the vociferous arguing that abortion should be completely unlimited and unfettered at any point during a pregnancy right up until the baby is delivered.

*looks around*

I mean yes, we think highly of Elixir here, but are we going to count Elixir as "men"? Is this a new identity thing, where individuals can be considered groups of people? I'm getting so behind the times.

Elixir hasn't been alone in this.

At some point in the process, it's not a zygote anymore, it's a fetus. At another point, it's no longer a fetus and becomes a baby. We can squabble about exactly when that point is... but it's a reasonable generality that during that last trimester, it's pretty much a baby.

Or an unviable fetus. You are putting effort in here, into a situation that wasn't common. Arbitrary abortions in the third trimester is going to be very hard to find a doctor to perform. And even less likely to see a woman want to go through. It was a strawman when the GOP waged a war against it and passed legislation to stop it.

Most people believe it isn't morally acceptable to arbitrarily perform that procedure at such a late period of time. The procedures almost exclusively involve a sobbing expectant mother who is entering the trauma of having lost her child. I know it seems completely bonkers to you that anyone would ever be opposed to letting a woman and her board licensed doctor to make what will be the hardest decision of the woman's life amongst themselves and not require politicians to get involved to determine if the fetus is unviable enough. But, some people apparently think it is important enough to interject bare hypotheticals in order to justify the government intruding into the life of a woman.

I know, right?! It takes all types!

*Sigh* And here's where I get really irritated.

MEDICALLY JUSTIFIED covers a whole lot. Like, it completely covers your unviable infant situation. And it also covers risks to the mother's health or life, severe disabilities, unforseen deleterious genetic conditions, and pretty much anything that has a medical component to it. I'm literally precluding the situation you yourself identify as being morally unacceptable.

And I've been so incredibly clear about absolutely no barriers in the third trimester for any medically justifiable reason that I can't possibly be any clearer about it.

I absolutely stand by my position that at some point it stops being a fetus and starts being a baby, and that I do NOT support killing a baby unless there's a really good medical reason to do so.

The fact that Elixir and apparently you can't wrap your head around the massive exception that I've already very happily conceded, and keep pretending like I'm somehow supportive of controlling women and forcing them to die in delivery is astonishing.

Please reread my post. You might get the point the second time around if you fully read it instead of Cliff Notes it.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

medically justified abortions for the last trimester.

That’s what I said.
Jump through legal hoops to obtain healthcare in the 3rd.

* benefits NOBODY

Except the babies that would otherwise be killed, of course.

* makes a handy platform for controlling and harming women

QED.

i don’t know why you want to re-litigate this stupidity.

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions without any medical justification, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of women don't support them.

Are men really arguing so vociferously for third-term abortions? The men I see arguing "vociferously" are the ones standing on sidewalks in front of the Reproductive Health Clinic... and it isn't in support of third-term abortions.

Looking around IIDB... yes, it's MEN doing the vociferous arguing that abortion should be completely unlimited and unfettered at any point during a pregnancy right up until the baby is delivered.

*looks around*

I mean yes, we think highly of Elixir here, but are we going to count Elixir as "men"? Is this a new identity thing, where individuals can be considered groups of people? I'm getting so behind the times.

Elixir hasn't been alone in this.

At some point in the process, it's not a zygote anymore, it's a fetus. At another point, it's no longer a fetus and becomes a baby. We can squabble about exactly when that point is... but it's a reasonable generality that during that last trimester, it's pretty much a baby.

Or an unviable fetus. You are putting effort in here, into a situation that wasn't common. Arbitrary abortions in the third trimester is going to be very hard to find a doctor to perform. And even less likely to see a woman want to go through. It was a strawman when the GOP waged a war against it and passed legislation to stop it.

Most people believe it isn't morally acceptable to arbitrarily perform that procedure at such a late period of time. The procedures almost exclusively involve a sobbing expectant mother who is entering the trauma of having lost her child. I know it seems completely bonkers to you that anyone would ever be opposed to letting a woman and her board licensed doctor to make what will be the hardest decision of the woman's life amongst themselves and not require politicians to get involved to determine if the fetus is unviable enough. But, some people apparently think it is important enough to interject bare hypotheticals in order to justify the government intruding into the life of a woman.

I know, right?! It takes all types!

*Sigh* And here's where I get really irritated.

MEDICALLY JUSTIFIED covers a whole lot. Like, it completely covers your unviable infant situation. And it also covers risks to the mother's health or life, severe disabilities, unforseen deleterious genetic conditions, and pretty much anything that has a medical component to it. I'm literally precluding the situation you yourself identify as being morally unacceptable.

And I've been so incredibly clear about absolutely no barriers in the third trimester for any medically justifiable reason that I can't possibly be any clearer about it.

I absolutely stand by my position that at some point it stops being a fetus and starts being a baby, and that I do NOT support killing a baby unless there's a really good medical reason to do so.

The fact that Elixir and apparently you can't wrap your head around the massive exception that I've already very happily conceded, and keep pretending like I'm somehow supportive of controlling women and forcing them to die in delivery is astonishing.

Please reread my post. You might get the point the second time around if you fully read it instead of Cliff Notes it.

Well if they did that then they wouldn't have any straw man arguments to use.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I really find it weird when men so vociferously argue for late-term voluntary abortions

It is disgustingly disingenuous of you to construe that I am “for” abortion whatsoever.
I have had to endure it with my partner multiple times. Her life has been under threat from pregnancy Has yours?

IF HER LIFE IS UNDER THREAT THEN BY ALL MEANS TERMINATE THE PREGNANCY!

if I am understanding Elixir correctly then the point is the woman should just be able to do that, not have to convince a lawyer/judge that she should be able to do that, which is what would happen if a ban were in place (even one with an exception for her in place). And that in some cases could put undue hardship on her, depending on the state she’s in and what kind of judges they have in that state.

Maybe I am misunderstanding Elixir. don’t know. But even lately there have been cases of women not getting or encointering potentially harming delays in the treatment they deserve because doctors fear making the case that these cases fit the exception.

but then again I am man so maybe my opinion doesn’t matter to you on this subject.

Nobody needs to convince a lawyer or judge, and certainly not ahead of time. That's why it's not a fucking ban!

JFC. What I want is exactly what was in place for almost all of my life, what was in place under Roe v. Wade. That didn't result in tons of women bleeding out in parking lots, nor in them having to get special dispensation from a judge ahead of time, nor any of the other "omg sky is falling" scenarios that keep getting trotted out as an argument against reinstating RvW!

I understand your position. I was attempting to understand elixirs, but he didn’t comment on my post so I don’t know If I got it right or not.

 

[southernhybrid]

During the years that I worked in public health as a nurse, including in family planning, and a maternity clinic, not once did I ever meet a woman who waned to have an abortion in her third term. I've never heard of anyone wanting one that late, so I doubt it ever happens.

Third term abortions are extremely rare and I'm pretty sure they are always related to either the condition of the fetus, unviable or severely impaired with a very slight chance of living more than a few days or weeks, or the life of the mother being in danger. Women don't get pregnant and then wait for 6 or 7 months, then suddenly decide they don't want to give birth. Women sometimes have to end a pregnancy at the end of the term, and I'm sure it's heartbreaking for them.

And, imo, a fetus is a fetus until it leaves the womb as a new born baby. When it's in the womb, it's still a fetus. I don't want to condemn anyone for having an opinion. I'm just stating mine, and it's at least partly based on my experience caring for pregnant women. During the one year that I worked in the maternity clinic for low income women, only one time did a woman opt for an abortion and that was in the first term, when abortion was safe and legal. Roe v Wade is dead now. We are back to making abortion a criminal offenses in many parts of the country.

When I worked in that clinic, if a pregnant woman was over 35, she was offered a test in the 2nd trimester to see if the fetus had Down's and if the test was positive she was offered the choice of an abortion. Things sure have changed since the 80s. Nobody should be forced to give birth to an infant that has a condition that makes them more likely to be severely disabled and difficult to raise. I did work with one nurse who had raised a child with Downs. She did a wonderful job of raising that child and she was against abortion, but didn't feel it was her right to tell other women what to do. Downs is a weird syndrome, which can leave one severely disabled to the point where they can't even feed themselves or speak, or not at all disabled, although most fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. An MD who specialized in genetic diseases explained that to one of my fellow student nurses and me when we were in school.