Comments on: Down’s Syndrome numbers don’t add up Insights from the UK and beyond Sat, 05 Nov 2016 11:44:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: anonymous geneticist Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:33:23 +0000 I am interested to see the NDSCR figures produced in response to this highly publicised DSA survey.A further element that particularly concerns me is the figure, variously reported online as ´almost a fifth´ or ´almost a half´ of those questioned who cited ´thinking that the baby was not going to have Down syndrome´ as a reason to continue with the pregnancy. Whilst this many be a manifestion of denial, which may be a potent component of coping with such a situation, surely this raises a major question about the degree/effectiveness of counselling that these women and their partners received?For pregnancies that had had cytogenetic confirmation of trisomy 21 (by amniocentesis, for example), the chances of the baby not having trisomy 21, i.e. Down syndrome, were exceptionally small indeed. (In contrast, in the case of people who chose not to have any invasive prenatal testing, where the likelihood of Down syndrome was suggested on scan findings only, there would indeed still have been significant uncertainty.)Down syndrome conception rates are higher as more women over the age of 35 are having children. These higher numbers of people requiring counselling in a pregnancy likely to be affected by Down syndrome must be addressed at a population level.The DSA´s view that Down syndrome is not an indication for termination of pregnancy is entirely in keeping with their purpose of promoting the rights and aspirations of people with Down syndrome and their families. Lobbying for appropriate counselling to be available for every pregnancy in which Down syndrome is suspected is compatible with this, and therefore it seems that this should be a priority area.