Do you think people with diseases should have children?

[Mortimer]

Schizophrenia may have some genetic substrate or undertone but this is not genetically inherited disease per se (unlike cystic fibrosis for example). Either way now people who suffer from some genetic illness or are carriers of it can select embryos to have healthy children. There are some for who this is unethical practice but it doesn't make sense at all. I watched documentary about British family with ill child (some blood disease) who decided to do it in purpose of rescuing that child with future transplant from healthy and biologically compatible kid. That's been way hard and I don't know whether they will have succeeded / did succeed with those attempts.

thanks. im not carrier of any genetic disease 23andme screens for. even my shizophrenia risk is genetically "average" but there might be some other snp which they didnt tested, but a shizophrenic and a healthy person are only 8% likely to have a child with higher risk for shizophrenia. i dont see why people say im genetically dysfunctional of defective etc. probably it is also because of my ethnic background, also on apricity are many people with anxiety, bipolar, or other cognitive/mental disorders and no one say such thing to them, probably because they are white etc. i think im average person. my condition isnt well for raising a child but lots of my problems are due to unhealthy lifestyle, for example the obesity, i dont have genetic obesity etc. not more then others. etc. i could find a woman of similar social, ethnic whatever background and have a child. but i dont know if i ever will, i think it is unlikely.

[Mortimer]

Bruce Lee: Wasn't your life hard because of your illness? Wasn't you bullied and taunt, and had many bad memories because of schizophrenia? Still, would you want your kids to suffer the same just because you want to 'spread your seed'? You realize how selfish is this? Nobody deserves to suffer, even less those who share the same blood ties as you. Even if there was just 1 or 5% chances of passing it; would you risk it?

I had a hard time growing up with asperger, luckily i'm tough as nail. But, what if my descendants aren't? This world is becoming more and more about social relationships and interactions, and in that department asperger people are inepts. Even if they have a high IQ this is pretty much useless for today's demands.

Having kids is not a right, nobody has right to have kids; this is some horrible bullshit made up concept. Ill and unintelligent people has the right to fuck the world over for healthy people who wants to breed with their defective descendants? I don't think so.

i was not bullied because of shizophrenia, i was diagnosed with shizophrenia and developed it at the age of 23 before i didnt had any signs of it etc. but that i was bullied and such could have contributed to shizophrenia also the abuse of alcohol and weed during my teenager years etc. no one is hundred percent healthy etc. we arent superhumans etc. also im not deformed or retarded. i have a illness but im not retarded, there are many people with some ilness it is not the same as down syndrome for example where you are not aware who you are etc. and you are retard and such

[Fortis in Arduis]

I copy-edited what you wrote, to make it easier to read and respond:

Thank you. I am not a carrier of any genetic disease 23andme screens for. Even my schizophrenia risk is genetically "average". There might be some other snp for which they did not test, but a schizophrenic and a healthy person are only 8% likely to have a child with higher risk for schizophrenia. I don not see why people say I am genetically dysfunctional or defective. Probably it is also because of my ethnic background. Also, on The Apricity there are many people with anxiety, bipolar, or other cognitive/mental disorders, and no-one says such a thing to them, probably because they are white etc. I think I am an average person. My condition is not good for raising a child, but lots of my problems are due to unhealthy lifestyle, for example the obesity. I do not have genetic obesity; not more than others. I could find a woman of similar social and ethnic background and have a child, but I do not know if I ever will. I think it is unlikely.

It is not because of your ethnic background that people here might advise you not to have children. It is because of your current lifestyle, and risk of passing that, and your mental condition, to any children that you might have. Armed with the facts, it is clear that this risk is low, should your partner not be similarly unwell. Honestly, this is why I feel that services should do more to help people in your predicament, with the minimal amount of medicine required to stabilise your condition. Have you ever read any R.D. Laing? His book "Self and Others", and "The Divided Self" [full pdf document], were of interest to me at one point. Certainly, I had adoptive parents who were caring but overbearing at times, with impossibly high standards for themselves and others.

One theory is that mixed messages in the home from parents can exacerbate schizophrenia, developing a 'schism' in the mind. If this is the case, in order to see this more clearly for yourself, you might have to move away from the influence of home, and engage with a good therapist, but you might never know, unless you do.

I have certainly not said that you should not be having children. What I maintain is that eugenic science should be made available to ALL prospective parents so that they have the option to prevent the passing of genetic disease. I do not agree with the 'slippery slope' argument that this would lead to genetically-modified humans, rather, that it would improve the quality of life of subsequent generations, if regulated and applied correctly.

You are fortunate that you live in a nice country like Austria, where help and support is available, but you certainly need to ask for it, and I suspect that you will need to be quite assertive, also.

You recognise that your obesity is self-created, so you have already taken responsibility. Even if you were genetically predisposed, and, I would suggest, that the medicine you take for schizophrenia [Risperadal / Risperadone?] is partly responsible, this is something that you could bring under control. Be watchful for any doctor who might see you simply as a patient with schizophrenia, rather than taking a more holistic approach.

What stops you from choosing a healthy lifestyle? Answering that question might be very difficult. I am having to ask and answer such a question myself, and I suspect that it has much to do with my neurological disorder, and my malcontented, never-pleased, and over-critical adoptive parents. If my God-like role models (parents) are never pleased with my success, why should I bother? Honestly, my mother was like an animal trainer in terms of her parenting, only extending care when I was unwell. Yes, I can see how that works, but this is about you.

You think that is unlikely that you will ever find a partner. This is simply not the case.

nota bene: if you are homosexual, please just get the fuck on with it, because life is very short indeed.

Obesity is unattractive. Obesity cushions the obese from the world, repelling human contact. Obesity also seems to be killing you slowly. Respirators and crutches are not a future that I could countenance. You are only so far away from permanent bed-whale with bed-baths and feeders. I also suspect that you have a feeder who either bends to your will, has little knowledge of nutrition, maintains that you are not a good boy unless you eat, or that you 'need' to eat what is given to you, or a combination or permutation of all of these. Somehow, I find it hard to imagine you going to a shop and buying fattening foods to eat without encouragement from someone else. Does this happen? Is someone feeding you for their own ends? Do you conflate food with love? Why not explore this? You are ultimately responsible.

Honestly, I think that you come here looking to justify your negative self-image. No-one here but the most retarded is going to dislike or hate you for your ethnicity, and I am not sure that you are hated at all. People might write that which you do not wish to hear, and this might make you feel uncomfortable, but that is not hatred. Right now, your prospects look pretty grim. Are you going to change them? Everyone loves a trier.

I was not bullied because of schizophrenia. I was diagnosed with schizophrenia and developed it at the age of twenty-three. Prior to this, I did not have any signs of it. That I was bullied and such could have contributed to schizophrenia, also, the abuse of alcohol and weed during my teenager years could have been a contributory factor. No-one is one hundred percent healthy. We are not super-humans. Also I am neither deformed nor retarded. I have a illness, but I am not retarded. There are many people with such illnesses. It is not the same as Down's Syndrome, for example, where the sufferer is not aware of who he or she is, and is a retard.

Everybody is bullied, and bullies bully that they might not themselves be bullied. Cannabis can indeed trigger the emergence of schizophrenia in teenagers. Think of it this way: you have been struck by an arrow from somewhere. What is your first concern? Who shot the arrow or why, or treating the wound? You need to treat the wound as a matter of priority. The question of who shot the arrow or why is a secondary concern. How are you treating the wound?

There are foods that you can eat and enjoy that are not fattening. If your digestion is sluggish because you do not move so much you could take the ayurvedic medicine Triphala. There are many choices. Certainly, you could follow a kapha-reducing diet:

http://www.chopra.com/community/onli...ps/kapha-dosha

Why not PM or chat with me in www.********.com/v8nodt about these issues? Do you not think that I care and want to help?

[Odin]

Nope.

[Larali]

It is often associated with genius. I do not like to sound like a bragger, but my IQ is in the upper two percentile, not that it counts for much IRL.

My relatives with schizophrenia were certainly not dullards, and it runs in many families.

This one, even: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princes..._of_Battenberg

This is true, I've seen in firsthand in my family. Two of my cousins have schizophrenia, and both were highly gifted as children. Many of my other cousins also have varying degrees of depression and bipolar (including myself, but I am OK now). The most seriously affected ones tended to be the ones who were higher on the IQ bell curve.

It's because schizophrenia is linked to creativity, originality and thinking outside the box. A more complex neural network, if you will. Look at John Nash.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forbes_Nash_Jr.

A mentally "healthy" person would never have been able to do the mental gymnastics required to make the discoveries he made.

Of course, this is not always the case, but a generalization.

Should people with diseases have kids? This would obviously be an individual decision made by the person in question, considering risks, drawbacks and personal ability. What we should never do is say that someone should not breed due to certain genes or risk for disease. This would be a straight path to... let's just say, a world we wouldn't want to live in.

**I would make an exception for physical diseases like cystic fibrosis, which are lethal and have no cure, and it would be highly likely that a child would inherit both genes for it and die.**

[Oneeye]

I think that voluntary policies should be in place to encourage eugenics. I'm not for prohibiting people from reproducing, but incentives for increasing middle class birthrate while lowering the birthrate of excon/felon parents should be implemented.

[sean]

No. It's amoral to pass on your shitty genetics to your kids and thus cause needless suffering. If you had a dog that only bred 3 legged puppies, how many times would you want to breed it? Just think of all the countless thousands of horrendous genetic diseases that are obvious because of the mental handicaps and physical disfigurements?




In the past, people with bad genetics used to die young from diseases. Even if they survived, they would not find anyone who wanted to marry them, so they didn't breed.

Our civilisation got really good at controlling infant mortality. Then we stopped shaming women for having children out of wedlock, so even women who no one wants to marry can pass on their genes.

My ideal scenario would be screening for these diseases, or at least what can be predicted should be screened, and if the child will clearly be unhealthy enough to a point that they cannot function in society on any level, it should be aborted.

For those who manage to escape screening, a sort of institutionalization would have to be implemented, unless the parents really want to take care of the child themselves. However these children must never be allowed to reproduce themselves, as unlikely as that is.

[IrisSelene]

No. It's amoral to pass on your shitty genetics to your kids and thus cause needless suffering. If you had a dog that only bred 3 legged puppies, how many times would you want to breed it? Just think of all the countless thousands of horrendous genetic diseases that are obvious because of the mental handicaps and physical disfigurements?




In the past, people with bad genetics used to die young from diseases. Even if they survived, they would not find anyone who wanted to marry them, so they didn't breed.

Our civilisation got really good at controlling infant mortality. Then we stopped shaming women for having children out of wedlock, so even women who no one wants to marry can pass on their genes.

My ideal scenario would be screening for these diseases, or at least what can be predicted should be screened, and if the child will clearly be unhealthy enough to a point that they cannot function in society on any level, it should be aborted.

For those who manage to escape screening, a sort of institutionalization would have to be implemented, unless the parents really want to take care of the child themselves. However these children must never be allowed to reproduce themselves, as unlikely as that is.

But what diseases and disorders would be considered bad enough to have this implemented? Or would there be different levels?

Or only 100% healthy people would be free to reproduce? Lol bc that would be a bit hard as most people have something or will have something in their lifetime, or at least be a carrier.

Enviado desde mi CLT-L09 mediante Tapatalk

[NSXD60]

If Incelidosis is inherited, then, God forbid!

[sean]

But what diseases and disorders would be considered bad enough to have this implemented? Or would there be different levels? Or only 100% healthy people would be free to reproduce? Lol bc that would be a bit hard as most people have something or will have something in their lifetime, or at least be a carrier.

Well, you look at the parents. If they are swarthy, or if they're living off welfare, are drug addicts, are criminals, have mental illnesses, have genetic diseases, are short and weak etc. then most probably the child will be the same.

All mental retards should be aborted from the womb without exception. All people with deformities which would cause them severe pain to the point where they could not function or an impossible life to live on their own should be aborted from the womb without exception.

All males and females who have hereditary diseases should be incentivized to become sterilised.

Doctors can pinpoint whether or not a child is going to have certain mental diseases extremely early in the birthing process.

Having older parents, particularly an older father, boost the risk of autism. People with autistic traits breed later in life because of lack of social skills so they pass on their own autistic traits to the kids.

Children born prematurely also are at increased risk of autism, and more premature infants survive now than ever before.

For instance, the older a woman is, the higher her chance of having a child with Down Syndrome.




It's one of the few chromosomal disorders that doesn't auto-abort in the womb.

In California (I think), they have this test and it's mandatory so that people can choose to get an abortion if their kid has the downs. As far as I know downies get aborted like crazy right now because ultrasound imagery has gotten a lot better in the last two decades and parents largely don't want a baby with downs.