I'm not referring to the chinless wonders who appear in the hooray set. No, I'm asking about Downes Syndrome, or with a cleft palate, misshapen limbs that are all present at birth.
Any ideas?
2007-08-01
07:56:48
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Health
➔ Diseases & Conditions
➔ Other - Diseases
It was a perfectly simple question!
Why did so many of you jump to so many conclusions, i.e., that I'm not well-read, I just don't read trash!
Also, someone assumed I'm American! Yeugh! (I don't mean that, I do have American muchachos!)
Also, I didn't ask why we 'never saw', but 'never see'! Many went into hysterical historical diatribes mainly to do with the in-breeding that was prevalent in the old European royal families - I didn't mention them!
And what the flick's Jordan got to do with anything?
2007-08-03
05:36:57 ·
update #1
And - ooops - it's Down Syndrome - I stand corrected, but where on earth did you get the idea that I believed only the poor were born with DS?
I asked why you never see such a child born to a wealthy family. I didn't suggest they don't have them. I presume they do!
I just wish to know if, perhaps, they're still hidden away, like the Queen Mother's sister was!
2007-08-03
05:43:54 ·
update #2
By the way, I just googled 'Down Syndrome', and everything came back as 'Down's syndrome'!
So there! d:-p
2007-08-03
05:47:30 ·
update #3
I have come across wealthy people with severely disabled children, such people usually live a more secluded life and therefore their children are not on public view.
2007-08-01 08:01:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Well, for one thing, I don't know where you got the idea that only poor people have children with Down Syndrome.
Anyone can have a child with Down Syndrome. It is just more prevalent in older women to have a Down Syndrome child.
However, the young women can also have one. No one knows the real reason for Down Syndrome but some have it mildly and others severe. Btw,it is Down and not Downes. Please go on line and type the word Down Syndrome and you will find all you want to know.
2007-08-01 08:02:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by makeitright 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you kidding? Try reading some history books.
The royal houses of Europe were riddled with congenital diseases, mainy haemophilia. The Russian revolution and the Spanis Civil War were both partly the result of a large section of the population not wanting someone with a hereditary defect to become King, or Tsar in Russia.
Our own Prime Minister has a child with cystic fibrosis. The leader of our opposition party has a child with severe disabilities.
If you think this doesn't happen in America, chances are your wealthy people simply hide their substandard offspring from public view.
2007-08-01 08:04:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by boojumuk 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
no longer anybody considers no longer marrying or having babies to be a sacrifice. To them, they in no way might have accomplished it besides, so what's the sacrifice. individually, I see myself probably being married sooner or later, yet no longer having babies. i don't experience like i might have the skill to grant a newborn the affection and interest it desires and nonetheless have the skill to have the way of existence that i choose. No, that would not advise in straight forward terms a extensive earnings. on an analogous time as a great paycheck may be intense high quality, this is greater approximately holiday and with the flexibility to do what i choose whilst i choose. i think of this is greater powerful to realize that form of ingredient in the previous babies come into the image, particularly than have them in straight forward terms to ensure which you at the instant are not cut back out for parenthood after the actuality. for people who discover their happiness of their spouses or babies, that's large. although, it would not advise that people who've desperate against it are a approach or the different unhappy or have a miles less friendly existence.
2016-10-09 00:03:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by pletcher 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's probably not true, but wealthy people would have more money to live a healthy lifestyle, and get medical care to prevent disabilities, and if they did have such a child, would have the money to have them live in a facility, not at home.
2007-08-01 08:06:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Im sure that it is an historical fact that the British royal family suffered haemophillia
As to congential defects - not sure if you think that speech issues are counted but the Queens Uncle suffered with speach difficuties
As to recent history not sure why but the aristocracy seem to be blessed but Katie Price - you know Jordon - is worth a few bob and her eldest has his troubles
2007-08-01 08:08:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mama8 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
have you never seen any sixties movies? the "undesireables" are hidden away in the attic for 30 years and then multiple murders are committed by the matriarch to protect the family secret. most important of all is to keep the secret from the hugely successful twin, who despite his business success feels a strange sense that something is missing in his life.
occasionally the long-serving butler/housekeeper man & wife will take the child as their own out of a sense of duty, but you can be assured that the child will grow up to fall in love with his/her birth sibling. seriously, they are just as common irrespective of wealth
2007-08-01 08:08:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by paul m 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
There's some sort of discriminatory thinking going on here. For example, the Kennedy's had a sister that was mentally retarded.
2007-08-01 19:00:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by Wildflower 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
most of the time they have nurses looking after there children
2007-08-01 08:08:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by nicola s 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
cause thier parents can afford medical treatment
2007-08-01 08:04:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋