We've all been hearing a lot lately about Bristol Palin. Like most, I agree with Obama in that a candidate's children are off limits in political campaigns. But I agree with many perspectives already voiced, with rare exception I don't think Palin's daughter has been any sort of target. Rather what has occurred is a discussion about what her teen pregnancy says about Sarah Palin's stance on a couple of issues, her ability to govern, and John McCain's judgment in selecting her.
But what about the other side? What about political campaigns using their own candidate's children to their political advantage? Both sides are a little guilty of this as both have sons who are ready to be deployed to Iraq and they have not been afraid to announce this to the world. But the way the McCain/Palin campaign has used her infant son to pander to voters and frame Sarah Palin is simply disgusting.
There's two prongs to my observations here, and I don't think I am wrong on the facts with either one, but if I am, by all means, feel free to correct me.
The first issue that they are using Trig Palin for is their attempt to pander to the right and obfuscate exactly how the abortion laws work in this country. I'm sure we have all seen some Republican surrogate on the idiot box trumpeting about how 'Sarah Palin chose to have her baby, even after learning that it had Downs Syndrome.'
Upon closer examination, Sarah Palin did not chose anything with respect to whether or not she should have Trig. Downs Syndrome can not be accurate detected in the vast majority of cases until the second trimester. The only way that it can accurately be detected during the first trimester is through a large battery of tests not conducive to busy moms on the go who are trying to hide the fact that they are pregnant. Now I don't know for sure, but the chances that Trig's disability was discovered during the first trimester is extremely small.
...
UPDATE: A few posters have stated my critique is not accurate with regard to the accuracy of first trimester testing for Downs. This is in contradiction with everything I read in putting my thoughts together. I am not a medical professional, so I don't have the capacity to intelligently argue either way. What I can be fairly certain of is that I wouldn't read on several medical and community websites and hear from a medical professional that lives in my own home that it can't be accurately detected during the first trimester while an entirely different set of conclusions has been reached by others without there being some controversy within the medical literature as to which is correct. If you're going to discuss the technical aspects of whether or not Downs is accurately detectable in the first trimester, please attempt to address this apparent contradiction and medical controversy.
...
UPDATE 2
The comments are quickly turning into a battle of experts amongst non-experts regarding the accuracy, availability, and risks of various birth defect tests. Nevermind way I found my way to making my point. Regardless of whether or not the Downs could have been detected early on, Sarah Palin is being championed for 'choosing' to not have an abortion in a manner that obfuscates and glosses over the real issues involved, and Trig is still being used as a political tool in this manner, regardless of which side of the medical controversies involved with these various tests you prefer.
...
So the question is, what options are available for expectant mother's who find out their baby will have Down's Syndrome? The aforementioned Republican surrogates will have you believe you can get an abortion after picking up dog food and having your oil changed at Wal-mart. 'Abortion on demand' is what they like to claim. Of course this isn't close to the truth. Even under Roe v. Wade, in all likelihood abortion was not an option for Sarah Palin as there is no indication that Sarah's health was in danger due to her pregnancy, and under the USSC's recent decision on 'partial birth' abortions, in all likelihood Sarah Palin could not have had a legal abortion when she found out that Trig had Downs.
The second issue they are using Trig Palin for is to pander to all of the Moms and Dads in this country that are victims of the Autism epidemic, and other parents that have children with diabilities. They do this by claiming they understand what parents with special needs children are going through. Sarah Palin made this claim herself during her speech.
Bullshit. Sorry, but Sarah Palin does not feel your pain. With all due respect Governor Palin, you don't know a God damn thing about raising a child with special needs. Your child is five months old. Five month old infants with Downs Syndrome have few special needs. They have pretty much the same needs as all infants: food, poop diapers changed, and love. That's it. As a parent of a special needs child (Angelman Syndrome), I can state unequivocally that Sarah Palin hasn't a fucking clue what challenges she has in store for her.
Sarah Palin is from the party that ensured that parents of Autistic children have no legal recourse against Big Pharma long before the science behind thimerisol was in. Sarah Palin is from the party that fights for the insurance companies ability to exclude the care for Autistic children from coverage. Sarah Palin is from the party that explicitly excludes funding for education for disabled children, and goes about slashing what little spending can be forced into the budget. This is not some hidden agenda of the Republicans. It is their spoken platform, and she expects the American people to believe she's going to somehow change that? From the VP slot?
But I suppose, with a traditional broadcast media that is constantly asleep on the job, she will get away with the pander, but my hope is the challenges to this fabrication starts with this diary about the Republicans' cynical use of a disabled infant as a political tool.