New blood test blamed as women choosing to abort babies with Down’s syndrome and other serious disabilities soars 34% in three years

  • New tests allow conditions to be more easily detected during pregnancy
  • As a result, the number of abortions of babies with disabilities has shot up
  • Last year, nearly 3,100 women chose to end pregnancies for this reason
  • Ten pregnancies were ended because babies had a cleft palate - a treatable condition

More women than ever are choosing to abort babies with genetic abnormalities after the introduction of new blood tests

More women than ever are choosing to abort babies with genetic abnormalities after the introduction of new blood tests

More women than ever are choosing to abort babies with genetic abnormalities after the introduction of new blood tests that allow the conditions to be more easily detected during pregnancy.

An investigation into figures published by the Department of Health reveals the number of abortions carried out because babies were found to have Down’s syndrome or other serious disabilities has increased by 34 per cent in just three years since 2011.

Last year, nearly 3,100 women chose to end their pregnancies because of medical problems with their babies, compared with 2,300 in 2011.

Of the difference of 800 abortions, the biggest proportion was linked to Down’s syndrome, with 693 terminations last year compared with 512 in 2011. A further ten were pregnancies ended because the babies had a cleft palate – a treatable condition.

Experts say the rise is linked to the availability of new privately available £500 blood tests that screen for Down’s and other congenital abnormalities without putting the unborn child at risk.

Generally, women identified by the NHS as being high-risk for a range of genetic problems are offered invasive tests such as amniocentesis, which involves passing a needle into the womb. It carries a one-in-100 risk of miscarriage.

For this reason, up to 40 per cent of women offered the tests refuse to take them for fear that they could lose a child without a disability.

The new tests, which analyse samples of foetal DNA found in the mother’s blood, provide a way of finding out about disabilities without endangering the life of the unborn child. But there are some concerns that healthy children could still be aborted in error as the tests are only 99 per cent accurate. It is understood that at least one woman had an abortion after falsely testing positive for a chromosomal problem.

Jane Fisher, director of the charity Antenatal Results and Choices, said: ‘Non-invasive prenatal testing has undoubtedly made a difference to the abortion figures.

‘Women tell us every day they are accessing the new blood tests privately, and this is likely to have led to a higher detection of chromosomal abnormalities and contributed to the rise in the number of terminations for these indications.

‘The reason we also know it’s made a difference is by looking at the statistics for invasive testing which have come down dramatically. It’s important to remember that these blood tests are screening, not diagnostic tests – so women found to be high-risk should have an amniocentesis to confirm any potential genetic abnormality.’

Generally, women identified by the NHS as being high-risk for a range of genetic problems are offered invasive tests such as amniocentesis, which involves passing a needle into the womb. It carries a one-in-100 risk of miscarriage 

Generally, women identified by the NHS as being high-risk for a range of genetic problems are offered invasive tests such as amniocentesis, which involves passing a needle into the womb. It carries a one-in-100 risk of miscarriage 

The blood tests have mainly been available privately in clinics across the UK for the past couple of years. However, selected NHS Trusts also refer high-risk women to private clinics for testing if they are reluctant to have an invasive procedure.

Last week it emerged that the tests could be available as standard across the NHS next year after successful trial data is presented to the National Screening Committee.

The trial found it would save the NHS money because fewer invasive tests would be needed, and the lives of about 300 unaffected babies, who are miscarried following amniocentesis, could be saved.

Dr Bryan Beattie, an NHS foetal medicine consultant in Wales, who also runs the Innermost Healthcare Clinic, which offers the private tests, said: ‘We’re seeing 50 to 60 women a week in our clinic alone.

‘We have a number of women where a structural abnormality or potential chromosomal problem has been detected at their scan and they don’t want an invasive test because of the miscarriage risk. Some, of course, end that pregnancy because of their results – but not all. Some are just happy to know what they’re facing.

‘Introducing such tests across the board is a no-brainer in terms of human cost. Every day, 40 mums with healthy babies are offered amniocentesis tests they don’t need, three babies are born with Down’s syndrome who were missed by screening, and every other day a healthy baby is miscarried because of invasive screening.’

But Dr Beattie added: ‘The real issue next, in around two or three years’ time, will be an ethical one – where do you stop? Do you screen for breast cancer genes, for Huntington’s – or taking it a step further, test for eye and hair colour?’

As well as Down’s syndrome, the DNA extracted from the blood test can be used to identify the risk of other chromosomal conditions such as Edwards’ and Patau syndromes, which cause severe brain abnormalities and heart defects.

The abortion figures also show that more women than ever before are opting to end their pregnancies after the legal limit of 24 weeks, which is permitted for medical reasons only.

In 2011, 146 were performed after this stage. By 2014, this had risen to 211 – a 44 per cent jump.

'I CRY WHEN I REALISE WHAT WE COULD LOSE', SAYS MOTHER 

A mother who set up a website about Down’s after her daughter was born with the condition has concerns about the test. 

Hayley Goleniowska, who set up Down’s Side Up after the birth of Natty, now eight, said: ‘I fear it will lead to a larger abortion rate of babies with Down’s. 

'In quieter moments I weep to think of what we could lose. Women need unbiased information – it’s not the test that worries me, it’s how it is implemented.’

Concerns: Hayley Goleniowska, who set up a website about Down’s after the birth of her daughter Natty

Concerns: Hayley Goleniowska, who set up a website about Down’s after the birth of her daughter Natty

 

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

By posting your comment you agree to our house rules.

Who is this week's top commenter? Find out now