88-year-old Genevieve Purinton thought she had no family left in the world until she reunited with her biological daughter on December 3.
Purinton resides in a retirement home in North Tampa. Her eight siblings died recently and had no other children after she gave birth at 18 in 1949 and was told the child had died.
Unbeknownst to Purinton, the child was born in Gary, Indiana, given up for adoption and raised in Southern California. It remains unclear as to why doctor’s misinformed Purinton about her daughter’s death.
“I asked to see the baby and they said she died, that’s all I remember,” Purinton told NBC.
Moultroup ended up adopted, but it took an unfortunate turn at the start. At five years, Moultroup’s adoptive father married an abusive step-mother.
For most of her youth, Moultroup hoped her biological mother would come to her rescue. “It’s been a lifetime of wanting this. I remember being five years old, wishing I could find my mother,” Moultroup, who now resides in Vermont, told Daily Mail.
“She would fantasize about her mother rescuing her since she was five years old. It’s truly her life-long dream,” Moultroup’s daughter Bonnie Chase, 50, added.
Moultroup was finally granted her life-long wish, when her daughter gave her an Ancestry DNA kit last Christmas.
“It was just a cool Christmas present and it has completely changed our lives,” Chase said.
The kit led Moultroup to call her cousin. “I said, “Here’s my mother’s given name,” Moultroup told WTNT. “She said, “That’s my aunt and she’s still alive.”
The mother and daughter reunited at the nursing facility earlier this week and cried joyous tears.
“We’re criers. We just cry a lot. There were a lot of tears and there’s been a lot of tears the entire time since then. It’s been really amazing,” Moultroup said.
“We’re thrilled that Ancestry was able to play a part in helping to connect Genevieve Purinton with her daughter after 69 years. We wish her and her family the best, and that this is the only beginning of an enduring relationship,” Jasmin Jimenez, a spokeswoman for Ancestry DNA told NBC.
The day before Mother’s Day, The Oregonian posted, unsurprisingly, an article on motherhood. What was surprising was it’s discussion of death in relation to mothers and their children with Tarvez Tucker, a doctor in the neuroscience intensive care unit at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Oregon.
The article began with a candid statement by the journalist, Tom Hallman Jr: “If we’re honest, many children see Mother’s Day as an obligation. Rarely do we reflect on what a mother’s love means. Nor do we acknowledge the truth that in time it will be just another Sunday in May.”
This reflection was prompted by Dr. Tucker’s writings on the deaths of some mothers she has seen in the ICU. One story describes a mother fatally shot on a stormy night, asking the nurse to take care of her four-year old son who was afraid of thunderstorms. Another describes a mother with cancer refusing exhaustive, experimental treatment that would only give her two more months to go home to dye eggs with her five young children.
Hallman states that Tucker’s reflections resulted in her belief that “the most profound expressions of love are the ones between mother and child. Hallman notes that this love is not greater than that of the father’s, but it is different since the mother carries the baby within herself, resulting in a unique intimacy that is at the root of motherhood. The moment the child is born, the mother must introduce her child into the world, “and so begins a lifetime of letting go” that ends with the hope that the mother can die with her children by her side, able to continue her work of carrying the world forward.
He ended the article by including Dr. Tucker’s thoughts on her own gift of motherhood to her four sons, stating that her sons “think she’s too sentimental, calling her mushy when she tries to explain the depth of love for the babies who grew into the men who one day will be by her beside when her time comes.” But she does want to leave them a message on her deathbed since “in those last moments, I hear how people love each other.”
Read more of Dr. Tucker’s stories in the original article on The Oregonian.
Current law in England prohibits most abortions after 24 weeks, but makes an exception for babies with Down Syndrome.
According to the 1967 Abortion Act, an abortion can be performed after 24 weeks if “There is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.” Due to this, many late-term abortions of babies with Down Syndrome have been justified.
Sarah Roberts was met with discouragement and negativity when she learned that her son has Down Syndrome. “The people who are delivering the news are negative. The first thing someone said to me was ‘I’m sorry, we suspect your baby has Down’s Syndrome. And to me, that message, just made me panic,” she said
To combat the stigma placed on people with Down Syndrome, Roberts keeps a blog called “Don’t Be Sorry.” Through the blog, Roberts started a petition against late-term abortions of babies with Down Syndrome, prompting visitors to sign the petition and support the cause.
According to the petition, “More and more people with Down Syndrome are living independently with varying degrees of support and in paid or voluntary work. Most adults with Down Syndrome can read and write.”
A testimony published last May by David A. Prentice, Ph.D., references a recent study that states that “99% of people with Down syndrome are happy with their lives, 99% of parents said they love their child with Down syndrome, and 97% of brothers/sisters, ages 9-11, said they love their sibling.”
This information shows that the chances of happiness for children born with Down Syndrome and those around them are very high. There are no grounds to abort them based on potential quality of life.
Sarah Roberts describes the effect her son Oscar has not only on her children, but all children as valuable. She says, “They don’t necessarily notice any differences yet but I’m sure as time goes on they will. But I think it’s going to be a benefit to them to have Oscar in their lives, and enrich [them].”
Women are successfully suing the National Health Service (NHS) after birthing healthy babies following failed abortion attempts. Such cases, reported by Health Minister Daniel Poulter, have cost the NHS thousands.
In the previous decade, the NHS paid over £94 million (approximately 147 million dollars) in legal cases concerning “wrongful births.” Dozens of these cases involved parents suing after the birth of a healthy child. Reasons ranged from “failed sterilization” to “failed terminations.”
“A healthy child is an occasion for thanksgiving,” former Bishop of Rochester Michael Nazir-Ali said. He criticized these women for “using up precious funds which could otherwise be more usefully employed.”
“It seems to me that to be able to sue the NHS after the birth of a healthy baby is simply not something the majority of people would agree with,” TV presenter Kirstie Allsopp said. “‘The NHS hasn’t got an infinite amount of money. I think parents in that position should think twice.”
The majority of the “wrongful birth” legal battles concern parents having disabled children after doctors failed to warn them of the risk. Yet new reports demonstrate such complaints are also made by parents with healthy children.
In such cases, claimants can typically expect payouts of £15,000 (approximately 23,500 dollars) to £40,000 (approximately 62,600 dollars).
“We understand that cases like this are distressing for the patient, but they remain extremely rare,” a Department of Health spokesperson told the Daily Mail.
A recent review, published by the Cochrane Library, found that whether a first-time mother gets an epidural early or late in labor makes no difference in the birth outcome.
An epidural is an injection of medicine, given just outside of the spinal column, to relieve the pain of childbirth.
The review “found no clinically meaningful difference between the early and late epidural groups in the risk for cesarean section or forceps birth, no difference in the length of labor, and no difference in Apgar scores of the babies,” according to The New York Times.
Data was pooled from nine randomized studies of early and late epidurals in 15,752 first-time mothers. The ‘early’ mothers received an epidural when their cervix was dilated less than four to five centimeters, and those who received an epidural late were dilated more than four to five centimeters.
The authors’ research analysis concluded that the best time for first-time mothers to receive an epidural is whenever they request one.