Community Tard Baby General (includes brain dead kids) - Fundies and their genetic Fuckups; Parents of corpses in denial

[Chickensandhawks]

PrayersforPaisley’s mom frequenty lies or is actually delusional about what Paisley is capable of doing.

She posted this today stating Paisley can sit up… when she’s clearly laying on an incline. She cannot sit up and she never will, her severely deformed anatomy will not let her.

 

[The-Mad-Asshatter]

It’s still a pretty big risk

I think it's long been assumed that Down's risk was solely attributable to the woman's increasing age, but they are finding now is that the man's advancing age contributes to this jump in risk too.

One older partner is risky, but when they are both old (as the older women frequently are with older partners) the risk increases a lot.

 

[cuddle striker]

Surely she can't have long enough for mama (who is dumb as a box of rocks) to do a Jahi LARP with her poor twitching corpse.

At any rate, spare a thought today for the staff at the Children's Hospital, who have finally been relieved of their legally mandated duty of daily child abuse. May they find peace and recovery from their trauma .

this is great news. let the family handle this abusive shit, those doctors have been through enough

 

[Barbarella]

this is great news. let the family handle this abusive shit, those doctors have been through enough

They’ll be back.

Unless this really is hospice, which I doubt.

 

[GenociderSyo]

 

[Thomas Eugene Paris]

Micro-chromosomal stuff is actually fairly hard to find unless you specifically look for it or its already characterized in literature hence why so many cases of autism are idiopathic.

Big chromosomal stuff you can just do a basic karyotype. Nowadays they dye em individual colors so big mix ups look like a mix and match Christmas tree. Doing this for smaller and smaller deletions or rearrangements becomes more and more intensive because you dye the individual genes you know for that area and see where it ends up when in chromosomes. Imagine doing that for every gene if you had no idea where the issue is! (Entirely do-able, just expensive and time consuming).

Exactly. This is what I mean when I say the geneticist needs to know what he's looking for before testing begins. It's just not possible to build a probe for everything, and there are some genes we don't even know the function of yet. For example, there appears to be a tumor suppressor locus on the long (q) arm of chromosome 11. We know this because in kids with a type of cancer called neuroblastoma, a tumor that carries a microdeletion in this area portends a dismal prognosis. Scientists have known about the importance of 11q- for decades now, but despite years of research, it's not clear which gene is responsible. There's a similar region at chromosome 1p36, and the gene of significance was recently identified as KIF2.

 

[Fiat Lux XOXO]

PrayersforPaisley’s mom frequenty lies or is actually delusional about what Paisley is capable of doing.
View attachment 3176929
She posted this today stating Paisley can sit up… when she’s clearly laying on an incline. She cannot sit up and she never will, her severely deformed anatomy will not let her.

Or is too ignorant to know the difference between sitting up and laying on an incline. Is she even strapped in? I could see her motionless body falling to the side.

 

[booklover]

Exactly. This is what I mean when I say the geneticist needs to know what he's looking for before testing begins. It's just not possible to build a probe for everything, and there are some genes we don't even know the function of yet. For example, there appears to be a tumor suppressor locus on the long (q) arm of chromosome 11. We know this because in kids with a type of cancer called neuroblastoma, a tumor that carries a microdeletion in this area portends a dismal prognosis. Scientists have known about the importance of 11q- for decades now, but despite years of research, it's not clear which gene is responsible. There's a similar region at chromosome 1p36, and the gene of significance was recently identified as KIF2.

Neuroblastoma usually has a fairly good prognosis (although the children have lifelong medical issues, usually related to having been given cisplatin - specifically, loss of hearing and kidney function) but sometimes, treatment just plain old does not work. This may explain why, at least in some cases.

Also, NB is a type of cancer that sometimes disappears, at a rate that cannot be explained by the treatments, and does not come back. Maybe children who experience THAT have a few extra genes in that area?

 

[Slobs]

That isn't from women, that is actually from men. After the early 40s, men will often have an increase in chromosomal mutations that bring a higher risk of siring a child with autism. It is for this reason sperm banks will not accept sperm from donors over the age of forty. With 40+ year old women, they will offer semen from donors in their 20s. Down' s Syndrome is also twice as likely with older men, hence why the 'younger' sperm for an older woman.

There are often a lot of jokes made about older women and their 'rotten' eggs, but just as much the fault lies with the man being too old.

-Edited

Yes, just as much, equally, which your post doesn't really imply. It is from both men and women, at the same age, if not worse for women because they have to carry the child. The misconception comes from the fact that women lose their fertility earlier than men, but women lose their fertility for a reason. A woman in her 40's is just as much a risk as some geriatric man in his 50's or 60's, men shouldn't be having children so late obviously, but women reading this shouldn't feel encouraged to have children in their 40s. It doesn't matter if you get your hands on some young sperm, you are a problem not only for the child if they're successfully born without complications, but you pose the risk of both miscarriage and misdevelopment; your chances of not carrying through pregnancy are massively higher, your chances of a severely ill children coming out of the door are exponentionally higher. You are not simply providing the information and genetic material for the child to develop, you are growing the child yourself, you're going through the miraculous task of creating new life and giving them nourishment with your own body. Any failure, or insufficiency, during those stages can and will have massive repercussions which is exactly why the stigma exists with older mothers.

That aside, young parents can and will have children with autism and other developmental disorders. It's often genetically predisposed. Chances are if you have severe mental issues, or if your family has a pattern of developing them, your children pose the risk of being on the spectrum. It's sad, and sometime even unavoidable despite being young, healthy, and well-adjusted. You just have to accept the risk and raise your children as well as you possibly can, and perhaps someday there'll be non-invasive and accurate screening to abort these misfortunate children before they're able to develop into a living being.

 

[Disgruntled Pupper]

Yes, just as much, equally, which your post doesn't really imply. It is from both men and women, at the same age, if not worse for women because they have to carry the child. The misconception comes from the fact that women lose their fertility earlier than men, but women lose their fertility for a reason. A woman in her 40's is just as much a risk as some geriatric man in his 50's or 60's, men shouldn't be having children so late obviously, but women reading this shouldn't feel encouraged to have children in their 40s. It doesn't matter if you get your hands on some young sperm, you are a problem not only for the child if they're successfully born without complications, but you pose the risk of both miscarriage and misdevelopment; your chances of not carrying through pregnancy are massively higher, your chances of a severely ill children coming out of the door are exponentionally higher. You are not simply providing the information and genetic material for the child to develop, you are growing the child yourself, you're going through the miraculous task of creating new life and giving them nourishment with your own body. Any failure, or insufficiency, during those stages can and will have massive repercussions which is exactly why the stigma exists with older mothers.

That aside, young parents can and will have children with autism and other developmental disorders. It's often genetically predisposed. Chances are if you have severe mental issues, or if your family has a pattern of developing them, your children pose the risk of being on the spectrum. It's sad, and sometime even unavoidable despite being young, healthy, and well-adjusted. You just have to accept the risk and raise your children as well as you possibly can, and perhaps someday there'll be non-invasive and accurate screening to abort these misfortunate children before they're able to develop into a living being.

I hate how off topic this thread gets so I'm only going to reply once but until birth control the average age of last child was from mid to late 40s. Even in the middle ages it was something like 42 in France and England. I actually agree that people- male or female- really shouldn't have kids past their mid 30s, but to pretend women can't have kids past that and the world will end and every baby will be a potato is biologically and historically false. On top of that, the reason women go through menopause is more because it becomes too hard on the body and not because the eggs are bad. They regularly pull eggs out of rich old women and while the sample sizes I've seen aren't huge and it's going to be a while before we arrive at true numbers, there isn't some huge decrease in viability after a certain age, it just gradually decreases just like sperm. You seem really angry in general that people have pointed out old sperm is retard sperm.

 

[Slobs]

I hate how off topic this thread gets so I'm only going to reply once but until birth control the average age of last child was from mid to late 40s. Even in the middle ages its was something like 42 in France and England. I actually agree that people- male or female- really shouldn't have kids past their mid 30s, but to pretend women can't have kids past that and the world will end and every baby will be a potato is biologically and historically false. You seem really angry in general that people have pointed out old sperm is retard sperm.

I said it myself didn't I? The chance of it happening is significantly higher; it isn't guaranteed but at every single stage from conception to birth there's an exponentially higher chance of failure; from miscarriage, to organs not developing properly, to malnourishment, or even if they're lucky and none of those happen it could be something as "minor" as the child being born with neurological disorders such as autism.

If you want me to powerlevel and state what my personal grief on this is, I personally know a middle-aged woman that had five miscarriages before she gave birth to a child with severe autism. He's an unhinged, screaming, non-verbal, non-toilet trained ball of pure misery. She expects her extended family members and welfare to deal with the retard in a decade or two. The risks and stupidity people will bullheadedly engage in only to pass on the responsibility and suffering to everyone else is fucking horrifying. With how many single mothers on welfare are featured in this thread alongside their tardspawn you'd think people wouldn't be encouraging older or dysfunctional women to have children when even their own bodies try to abort them, but here we are.

 

[Turtlebees]

I said it myself didn't I? The chance of it happening is significantly higher; it isn't guaranteed but at every single stage from conception to birth there's an exponentially higher chance of failure; from miscarriage, to organs not developing properly, to malnourishment, or even if they're lucky and none of those happen it could be something as "minor" as the child being born with neurological disorders such as autism.

If you want me to powerlevel and state what my personal grief on this is, I personally know a middle-aged woman that had five miscarriages before she gave birth to a child with severe autism. He's an unhinged, screaming, non-verbal, non-toilet trained ball of pure misery. She expects her extended family members and welfare to deal with the retard in a decade or two. The risks and stupidity people will bullheadedly engage in only to pass on the responsibility and suffering to everyone else is fucking horrifying. With how many single mothers on welfare are featured in this thread alongside their tardspawn you'd think people wouldn't be encouraging older or dysfunctional women to have children when even their own bodies try to abort them, but here we are.

Sorry, this will be a major power level but the hysteria about older parents reads differently to me as mine were both above any recommended age when I was conceived.

My mother was well into her 40s and not in perfect health when she had me, her one and only child, and there were no dire medical complications for either of us. My childhood best friend also had a mother in her late 40s - we bonded in grade school over the fact our parents were significantly older than those of our peers. My oldest coworker to give birth was 47 at the time and her son is, so far, perfectly healthy. A teen mom I grew up with birthed a severely disabled child. Personal anecdotes don't count for much.

Only a handful of my friends and acquaintances had children young. Most waited or are waiting until their mid-thirties. Is this wise? I don't know. It gives time to finish some proper education and get settled into life, but it does bring potential complications, especially fertility concerns.

There is one thing that I feel needs mentioning; if you have children very late, you may raise them differently. For instance, my childhood friends went skiing with their young and athletic parents while mine took me to museums. I also lost both parents young, in my 20s, because they were both already into their 60s when I graduated high school. That's why I wouldn't want to push parenthood as late as my parents did; prenatal testing exists, as does legal abortion, where I live but time catches up to people and most parents don't want their children to experience home elder care when they should busy going to university, exploring potential life paths, and otherwise enjoying their youth.

 

[obsdj]

...

So anyway, tard babies and braindead kids, amirite?

 

[Chandelier]

I don’t know why you’re sperging about Down syndrome, something every pregnant woman is tested for and has been essentially eradicated in many parts of the world.

Most of the tards in this thread are the result of rare genetic mutations or catastrophic accidents.

It's eradicated in Europe. In the US there's a push to have Downie babies. In many states you cannot abort if there's a Down Syndrome diagnosis.

Blame the Fundies.

 

[Android raptor]

If you want me to powerlevel and state what my personal grief on this is, I personally know a middle-aged woman that had five miscarriages before she gave birth to a child with severe autism. He's an unhinged, screaming, non-verbal, non-toilet trained ball of pure misery. She expects her extended family members and welfare to deal with the retard in a decade or two. The risks and stupidity people will bullheadedly engage in only to pass on the responsibility and suffering to everyone else is fucking horrifying. With how many single mothers on welfare are featured in this thread alongside their tardspawn you'd think people wouldn't be encouraging older or dysfunctional women to have children when even their own bodies try to abort them, but here we are.

Somehow I get the feeling that autism alone isn't the reason why this kid is an unhinged ball of misery, and how he's treated by his family and extended family has a lot to do with it.

 

[Diana Moon Glampers]

I hate how off topic this thread gets so I'm only going to reply once but until birth control the average age of last child was from mid to late 40s. Even in the middle ages it was something like 42 in France and England. I actually agree that people- male or female- really shouldn't have kids past their mid 30s, but to pretend women can't have kids past that and the world will end and every baby will be a potato is biologically and historically false. On top of that, the reason women go through menopause is more because it becomes too hard on the body and not because the eggs are bad. They regularly pull eggs out of rich old women and while the sample sizes I've seen aren't huge and it's going to be a while before we arrive at true numbers, there isn't some huge decrease in viability after a certain age, it just gradually decreases just like sperm. You seem really angry in general that people have pointed out old sperm is retard sperm.

Yeah, 35 is only considered clinically relevant for one reason: amniocentesis carries a miscarriage risk of about .5%, or 1 in 200. Around 35, the risk of Down Syndrome becomes equivalent, 1 in 200. This means it's no longer dumb to do an amnio at this age. That's it. By age 40 that risk is still around 1 in 100. There is no time in the reproductive life that chromosomal abnormalities become the norm rather than the unusual exception. If amnios had a lower miscarriage risk (say, 1 in 500) we'd probably start testing at age 30.

 

[Fiat Lux XOXO]

This is so cringy to me. Queen Paisley has gotten her way? My gosh, here we go again with this. Her mother seems to wholeheartedly believe Paisley is capable of exerting her will and that she has several likes and dislikes. It's so incredibly annoying when she gets a new toy and supposedly "loves" it or has "conversations" with daddy. One thing I've noticed about Paisley is that she tends to mimic others. Sheobviously cant communicate verbally in any meaningful way or comprehend what's happening around her. But she'll repeat others' non verbal cues, like nodding and other sounds, like the ones made by her cactus toy. Of course, her mother will say it's "interacting" but to me its more like mindless mimicking. I wonder if that has anything to do with cognitive delays, but it makes it difficult to not see her as a tard.

 

[Jeep1971]

It's eradicated in Europe. In the US there's a push to have Downie babies. In many states you cannot abort if there's a Down Syndrome diagnosis.

Blame the Fundies.

I totally blame the Fundies.

 

[Nines153]

View attachment 3182573

This is so cringy to me. Queen Paisley has gotten her way? My gosh, here we go again with this. Her mother seems to wholeheartedly believe Paisley is capable of exerting her will and that she has several likes and dislikes. It's so incredibly annoying when she gets a new toy and supposedly "loves" it or has "conversations" with daddy. One thing I've noticed about Paisley is that she tends to mimic others. Sheobviously cant communicate verbally in any meaningful way or comprehend what's happening around her. But she'll repeat others' non verbal cues, like nodding and other sounds, like the ones made by her cactus toy. Of course, her mother will say it's "interacting" but to me its more like mindless mimicking. I wonder if that has anything to do with cognitive delays, but it makes it difficult to not see her as a tard.

This is just so sad to watch someone be so delusional about their child's ability

 

[George Lucas]

I was a tard baby.