there are conditions that an infant cannot survive.  there are also conditions that can be corrected in uttero, and that's probably the reason.  

Really stupid.  If you are going to have an infant with a problem, better that you know so the doctors and hospital can be prepared to handle it as best they can.  Also, there are some conditions that can be detected in utero that necessitate a cesarean section to protect the baby.

Slightly OT, but if the media is ever allowed anywhere near Sarah Palin someone ought to ask her whether she believes women who have abortions should be arrested and tried for 1st degree murder.

I would really like to hear her answer.

This diary is sinister and utterly compromising to Obama and Democrats.

This issue is a loser, even IF there weren't a totally benign explanation to it.  Besides, part of being pro-choice means that you give all people the benefit of the doubt on stuff like that and leave them alone; I know the issue is hypocrisy and not abortion per se, but that level into Sarah Palin's pregnancy is repugnant.

No offense.

I think the more relevant question has to do with the odd circumstances surrounding the birth of Trig.  That story just does not make any sense, and it has nothing to do with the baby, but everything to do with her judgment and decision-making.  What kind of person would get on a 10 hour flight to Alaska after having just gone into labor????  

I think all women over a certain age who are pregnant are strongly recommended to have this test.

Her family planning decisions are decidedly not my business.

There are certain medical proceedures that can be done on a baby for it's health prior to birth, and I am not talking about abortion.  Amniocentesis can identify potential medical problems even at birth, and they can attempt to prevent them.  If you were having a child with a disability, are you telling me you would not want to know prior to birth, so that you could better prepare for them and their care?

I oppose Palin on issues, but all this fascination with her pregnancy and ridiculous speculation is a disgrace.  Maybe you ought to educate yourself on proceedures, and pregnancies before you post. Hasn't the left gotten enough bad press with all this fascination with her private life.  Do you have to continue to prolong the backlash?

I started to write a long reply about our own family -- and the discussions we had about whether or not have an amnio to confirm a likely diagnosis of Down syndrome, even though we knew we would never abort our son (who is now a gorgeous four-year-old boy blessed with an extra chromosone.)

Then I thought, why bother.  Because that's not the point.  The point is, no one has any business even inquiring about this.

is to commend all the commenters for your reaction. This is the kind of patient erudition I wish we could see on all the threads, even those we deem "trollish".

There are a ton of things to fault Sarah Palin on.  This is not one of them.

Doing an amnio for a woman who is over 40 is NOT simply to determine whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. Amnio (and other prenatal screenings) can provide vital information to have the appropriate resources on hand at a baby's birth.

Just to give one example, many Downs babies also have congenital heart defects. Information gained from an amnio (and a follow up cardiac ultrasound) could ensure that a pediatric cardiologist is on hand at delivery.

Amnio for a woman over 40 is considered smart medicine. Period.

You are nuts to think the only reason a woman has an amino is to help in a decision about abortion. Very strange opinion to have.

The poster is correct. Amnio makes no sense if abortion is not an option.

MOST pro-life women choose not to do amniocentesis for the reasons many posters have stated:  abortion is not an option, and amniocentesis does in itself carry a risk.  (About 1 pregnancy in 200 will miscarry as a direct result of amnio.)  But some pro life women do choose to, in order to be aware of some medical problems (most typically Down's and spina bifida) so they can plan their births accordingly.

But that's what's so absurd here.  That's why there's something SO fishy in this story.  We are expected to believe that Sarah Palin had a test whose ONLY purpose for her would have been to diagnose conditions prenatally so that she could make "better" choices for her delivery... and then... what?  She ignored them.  She chose as her doctor, supposedly, a family practice doctor who lived 800 miles from her primary residence.  She chose to give birth at a facility with no NICU even though about a third of Down's babies have heart problems, and a small percentage need surgery right after birth.  She chose to get on an airplane leaking amniotic fluid and having (at least some) contractions and travel over 12 hours at 36 weeks of pregnancy! And on top of all of this, we're supposed to believe that a doctor went along with it!

And yet anyone who points out how really implausible all of this is somehow "going after families" or not respecting her privacy or something.  

People, this whole thing stinks.  As a medical professional, I can say that NOTHING that this woman did regarding her pregnancy, labor, or delivery is plausible or defensible.