from what I remember reading on other sites she was pregnant with Dane's baby at the time of the sex tape and later went on to have an abortion.
To be honest i thought it was Danes baby, but i was told i was wrong, and it was actually Harvey. If that was Danes baby, that is shocking because she was actually showing a bump, before getting rid :mad:
But people on this very thread have given evidence from medical professionals that state clearly what factors would contribute to his medical condition.
So if you ignore that then you are being ignorant to suit the fact you like KP. So you can believe it but its not 100% fact.
Had Katie not been getting totally trollyed , only then can it be said that it is not a contributing factor
It probably is Betty but I don't believe any doctor would tell her that it was 100% certainly genetic as they couldn't possible know for sure.
Also, the way she conducted herself while pregnant will always mean there is a doubt in peoples minds and I'm sure in hers as well. Maybe by keep repeating that she KNOWS it's genetic, she's trying to convince herself?
^ This. I'm sure she feels a lot of guilt over it. Deep down. For that reason, as awful as she is, I feel sympathy for her because it can't be an easy thing to live with. She can't change the past and to have it thrown in her face by whoever this latest person is, is cruel imo. And anyone who takes pleasure from her discomfort over it is imo equally cruel.
I dont remember any of these attacks taking place when she was expecting Princess and Junior. Harvey is 10 years old and we now have this bra model deciding to get herself in the paper by saying his mother was culpable 10 years ago. One has to ask, why now?
Just reading an article in the Guardian about Katie which someone linked to in the Politics Forum. A very tiny mention 10 paragraphs down about Amy Price last year spending 3 months in Goa working with slum children. I can't find anymore details.
It probably is Betty but I don't believe any doctor would tell her that it was 100% certainly genetic as they couldn't possible know for sure.
Also, the way she conducted herself while pregnant will always mean there is a doubt in peoples minds and I'm sure in hers as well.
Maybe by keep repeating that she KNOWS it's genetic, she's trying to convince herself?
Harvey Price's disabilities are septo-optic dysplasia, which causes blindness and growth hormone deficiency; Prader-Willi syndrome, a genetic disorder that means he is likely to eat to excess and is prone to obesity and diabetes; as well as ADHD and autism. .
I do believe that he has recently been diagnosed with more disorders.
The following is taken from The Prader-Willi Syndrome Association website:
Why does PWS happen?
If your baby has just received a new diagnosis of PWS you might be feeling upset and confused. Or, if you have an older child, you might have just got the answer to years of not understanding why they seem a little different from their peers. You may be asking, why has my child got PWS?
It is important to know that a diagnosis of PWS is not your fault. Chromosomes come in pairs, and PWS is simply due to the baby failing to receive active paternal genes from a specific section of one chromosome 15. There are three main ways that this can happen.
• If your child has a ‘deletion’ (about 70% of all cases of PWS) it means that part of the chromosome 15 inherited from the child’s father is missing.
• If your child has ‘maternal uniparental disomy (UPD)’ (about 25% of cases) it means they have taken both copies of chromosome 15 from one parent — the mother.
• If you are told that your child has an ‘imprinting defect’ (less than 5% of cases) it means that the ‘PWS genes’ on the father’s chromosome 15 are present but do not work because the imprinting process is faulty. (Further testing and genetic counselling are especially important for families who have a child with an imprinting defect.)
Neither deletion nor UPD types of PWS are hereditary and neither type is likely to reoccur in the family.
My intention is to show that at least ONE of Harvey's disabilities is genetic.
I dont remember any of these attacks taking place when she was expecting Princess and Junior. Harvey is 10 years old and we now have this bra model deciding to get herself in the paper by saying his mother was culpable 10 years ago. One has to ask, why now?
My thoughts exactly re Harvey, that and a few other things that are stirring.
In fairness, it's not Harvey being criticised, it's KP. Her behavior is being called into question and she only has herself to blame because she's made sure that the whole world knows about every aspect of her life.
No Harvey isn't being criticised .. But his disabilities are being used to criticise his mother ..
Fizgig
You wrote " what has PA given in he past few months " #589
To which Diamond Doll replied " you will find your answer in a PA thread " #590
I'm not accusing you of anything ..
Harvey Price's disabilities are septo-optic dysplasia, which causes blindness and growth hormone deficiency; Prader-Willi syndrome, a genetic disorder that means he is likely to eat to excess and is prone to obesity and diabetes; as well as ADHD and autism. .
< - snip - >
My intention is to show that at least ONE of Harvey's disabilities is genetic.
? This is the second time someone has chosen to respond to Blondie's very innocuous post with what reads like a lecture about Harvey's condition. Why not target someone - and you'd be spoilt for choice on this thread - who's actually far more vocal about casting doubt on the genetic aspect of his condition, rather than someone who just voiced a very reasonable opinion on KP's response to the criticism?
Just reading an article in the Guardian about Katie which someone linked to in the Politics Forum. A very tiny mention 10 paragraphs down about Amy Price last year spending 3 months in Goa working with slum children. I can't find anymore details.
? This is the second time someone has chosen to respond to Blondie's very innocuous post with a lecture about Harvey's condition. Why not target someone - and you'd be spoilt for choice on this thread - who's actually far more vocal about casting doubt on the genetic aspect of his condition, rather than someone Can you not see how annoying it might be?
"but I don't believe any doctor would tell her that it was 100% certainly genetic as they couldn't possible know for sure."
"Maybe by keep repeating that she KNOWS it's genetic, she's trying to convince herself?"
Did anyone say that I was criticizing Blondie's comment? No, I did not. The above comments are why I selected hers. Hoping that an intelligent exchange about it might occur, also she appeared as someone with an open mind set.
May I remind you that Blondie reacted to someone else's comment, not mine.
It's interesting though that you interpreted my comment as lecturing, whereas you would be spoilt for choice with other comments here in that department.
No Harvey isn't being criticised .. But his disabilities are being used to criticise his mother ..
As far as I can see, the only comments have been about what KP did during her pregnancy with Harvey and how those things could have affected him. No-one is saying that they did affect him. The truth is, we don't know what caused Harvey's disabilities, but as KP has put them in the public domain, people will comment.
KP chooses to live her life in the glare of the public spotlight. You can't do that then moan that people are commenting on your life.
Fizgig
You wrote " what has PA given in he past few months " #589
To which Diamond Doll replied " you will find your answer in a PA thread " #590
I'm not accusing you of anything ..
But it was in response to two other posts about PA, which I HAVE ALREADY QUOTED.!
Point of matter - PA was brought up on a thread, and when I replied about him, I was told I should go to the PA thread!!!
TACTICS!
As far as I can see, the only comments have been about what KP did during her pregnancy with Harvey and how those things could have affected him. No-one is saying that they did affect him. The truth is, we don't know what caused Harvey's disabilities, but as KP has put them in the public domain, people will comment.
KP chooses to live her life in the glare of the public spotlight. You can't do that then moan that people are commenting on your life.
Totally agree with you Johartuk .. She has said many times she is open to critacism but to use her child to do so is wrong..
"Maybe by keep repeating that she KNOWS it's genetic, she's trying to convince herself?"
Did anyone say that I was criticizing Blondie's comment? No, I did not. The above comment is why I selected hers. Hoping that an intelligent exchange about it might occur, also she appeared as someone with an open mind set.
May I remind you that Blondie reacted to someone else's comment, not mine.
It's interesting though that you interpreted my comment as lecturing, whereas you would be spoilt for choice with other comments here in that department.
Sorry, that's how it came across to me. Had you just posted without quoting, it would have read differently as you're making a good point.
Blondie's comment was about KP's response to Harvey's condition, not Harvey's actual condition or the causes of it. Two completely separate things.
But it was in response to two other posts about PA, which I HAVE ALREADY QUOTED.!
Point of matter - PA was brought up on a thread, and when I replied about him, I was told I should go to the PA thread!!!
TACTICS!
I've always thought that KP couldn't care less what anyone says or thinks because as long as she is being noticed she's happy.
As a sidenote that's why I don't much bother commenting on KP (unless birthday brandy was taken ) because I think her only agenda is to gain attention and I find it tedious and not amusing at all...........unlike her ex side-kick who I find hilarious.:D
Agree on both points.
KP would love to be liked but she'd rather be hated than ignored. For her, negative opinion is better than no opinion at all.
On the second point, he amuses me big time. She is a horror but then vile is as vile does and she annoys me rather than tickles me. She is obviously a far more spiteful person but his neediness and good guy act is the gift that keeps on giving for me.
So where's the sense in saying that I BROUGHT PA UP in post 589?
? This is the second time someone has chosen to respond to Blondie's very innocuous post with what reads like a lecture about Harvey's condition. Why not target someone - and you'd be spoilt for choice on this thread - who's actually far more vocal about casting doubt on the genetic aspect of his condition, rather than someone who just voiced a very reasonable opinion on KP's response to the criticism?
Can you not see how annoying it might be?
TBH I don't see anyone posting any differently to Blondie, it's an opinion, whoever disagrees with it.
The fact is drinking whilst pregnant does not do a foetus any good. It is HER actions that myself and a lot of people find repulsive..... I think the point is pertinent as she continues to play hard and fast with her children, psychologically with the constant and confusing parade of uncles, and if she is jumping horses, taking a ridiculous and totally unnecessary risk no matter who pipes up that 'her' doctor says it's o.k
And this is all done for her own gratification and is not in a million years in these children's best interests, and in that regard she absolutely stinks as a parent, and the worst of it is that she will never learn or change.
I really don't care who finds it unpalatable....I find that behaviour, and racially derogatory comments completely vile and indefensible.
Again Goldbear the word is COULD ..yet some on here insist it is FACT .. I believe his condition is genetic.
Also how do you know if Katie wouldn't cope .. I find it pathetic she is slated or having help.. Thousands of families get support with their disabled children.. Having money is a bonus as Katie can afford the best. And has often said so..also when a family is faced with this situation a lot help them out..that's the right thing to do surely..
Families get rest bite care so they can have family time with their other children whilst someone specifically trained looks after their disabled child ..
Please quote where anyone has stated it as fact.
You say you work with disabled ? Rest bite ?
That would be respite actually.
You say you work with disabled ? Rest bite ?
That would be respite actually.
Thank you spelling police .. It was predictive text and until you pointed it out I hadn't noticed .. Thank you I will correct it now :rolleyes:
Sorry Janna it won't let me correct it .. So you are going to have to deal with it.. And yes until my illness I worked with young adults with severe behavioural problems as well as disabilities .. I will give you the full details I.e. my name ,place of work and ex managers number if you want o confirm this in a PM
"but I don't believe any doctor would tell her that it was 100% certainly genetic as they couldn't possible know for sure."
This comment above which I added later is also why I selected Blondie's comment.
Because the specialists do know....re the
Prader-Willi syndrome which Harvey has...that this is genetic.
We seem to be at cross purposes here. There are two separate conversations going on: one is to do with Harvey's condition and its nature, the other is to do with why KP is seen by some to possibly have some responsibility for it (because of how she behaved during her pregnancy.)
My position is that while I understand the criticism of that behaviour, and no one can say for sure that it didn't impact upon Harvey, I don't see it as grounds to keep on bashing her over it, as I think it's really cruel.
Comments
To be honest i thought it was Danes baby, but i was told i was wrong, and it was actually Harvey. If that was Danes baby, that is shocking because she was actually showing a bump, before getting rid :mad:
Had Katie not been getting totally trollyed , only then can it be said that it is not a contributing factor
^ This. I'm sure she feels a lot of guilt over it. Deep down. For that reason, as awful as she is, I feel sympathy for her because it can't be an easy thing to live with. She can't change the past and to have it thrown in her face by whoever this latest person is, is cruel imo. And anyone who takes pleasure from her discomfort over it is imo equally cruel.
This ^^^^
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/sep/28/katie-price-harvey-son-disability
Harvey Price's disabilities are septo-optic dysplasia, which causes blindness and growth hormone deficiency; Prader-Willi syndrome, a genetic disorder that means he is likely to eat to excess and is prone to obesity and diabetes; as well as ADHD and autism. .
I do believe that he has recently been diagnosed with more disorders.
http://www.pwsa.co.uk/index.php/what-is-pws
The following is taken from The Prader-Willi Syndrome Association website:
Why does PWS happen?
If your baby has just received a new diagnosis of PWS you might be feeling upset and confused. Or, if you have an older child, you might have just got the answer to years of not understanding why they seem a little different from their peers. You may be asking, why has my child got PWS?
It is important to know that a diagnosis of PWS is not your fault. Chromosomes come in pairs, and PWS is simply due to the baby failing to receive active paternal genes from a specific section of one chromosome 15. There are three main ways that this can happen.
• If your child has a ‘deletion’ (about 70% of all cases of PWS) it means that part of the chromosome 15 inherited from the child’s father is missing.
• If your child has ‘maternal uniparental disomy (UPD)’ (about 25% of cases) it means they have taken both copies of chromosome 15 from one parent — the mother.
• If you are told that your child has an ‘imprinting defect’ (less than 5% of cases) it means that the ‘PWS genes’ on the father’s chromosome 15 are present but do not work because the imprinting process is faulty. (Further testing and genetic counselling are especially important for families who have a child with an imprinting defect.)
Neither deletion nor UPD types of PWS are hereditary and neither type is likely to reoccur in the family.
My intention is to show that at least ONE of Harvey's disabilities is genetic.
However, the one good thing is that Katie obviously adores Harvey( in her own way).
My thoughts exactly re Harvey, that and a few other things that are stirring.
No Harvey isn't being criticised .. But his disabilities are being used to criticise his mother ..
You wrote " what has PA given in he past few months " #589
To which Diamond Doll replied " you will find your answer in a PA thread " #590
I'm not accusing you of anything ..
? This is the second time someone has chosen to respond to Blondie's very innocuous post with what reads like a lecture about Harvey's condition. Why not target someone - and you'd be spoilt for choice on this thread - who's actually far more vocal about casting doubt on the genetic aspect of his condition, rather than someone who just voiced a very reasonable opinion on KP's response to the criticism?
Can you not see how annoying it might be?
that's the most interesting article I've read about Pricey in a long time, thanks
you could say mysteriously stirring
"but I don't believe any doctor would tell her that it was 100% certainly genetic as they couldn't possible know for sure."
"Maybe by keep repeating that she KNOWS it's genetic, she's trying to convince herself?"
Did anyone say that I was criticizing Blondie's comment? No, I did not. The above comments are why I selected hers. Hoping that an intelligent exchange about it might occur, also she appeared as someone with an open mind set.
May I remind you that Blondie reacted to someone else's comment, not mine.
It's interesting though that you interpreted my comment as lecturing, whereas you would be spoilt for choice with other comments here in that department.
As far as I can see, the only comments have been about what KP did during her pregnancy with Harvey and how those things could have affected him. No-one is saying that they did affect him. The truth is, we don't know what caused Harvey's disabilities, but as KP has put them in the public domain, people will comment.
KP chooses to live her life in the glare of the public spotlight. You can't do that then moan that people are commenting on your life.
But it was in response to two other posts about PA, which I HAVE ALREADY QUOTED.!
Point of matter - PA was brought up on a thread, and when I replied about him, I was told I should go to the PA thread!!!
TACTICS!
Totally agree with you Johartuk .. She has said many times she is open to critacism but to use her child to do so is wrong..
Sorry, that's how it came across to me. Had you just posted without quoting, it would have read differently as you're making a good point.
Blondie's comment was about KP's response to Harvey's condition, not Harvey's actual condition or the causes of it. Two completely separate things.
Tactics?? By DD ..:D:D:D:D:D
Why do you fail to see what's pointed out plainly & clearly?
POST 586
POST 587
So where's the sense in saying that I BROUGHT PA UP in post 589?
"but I don't believe any doctor would tell her that it was 100% certainly genetic as they couldn't possible know for sure."
This comment above which I added later is also why I selected Blondie's comment.
Because the specialists do know....re the
Prader-Willi syndrome which Harvey has...that this is genetic.
TBH I don't see anyone posting any differently to Blondie, it's an opinion, whoever disagrees with it.
The fact is drinking whilst pregnant does not do a foetus any good. It is HER actions that myself and a lot of people find repulsive..... I think the point is pertinent as she continues to play hard and fast with her children, psychologically with the constant and confusing parade of uncles, and if she is jumping horses, taking a ridiculous and totally unnecessary risk no matter who pipes up that 'her' doctor says it's o.k
And this is all done for her own gratification and is not in a million years in these children's best interests, and in that regard she absolutely stinks as a parent, and the worst of it is that she will never learn or change.
I really don't care who finds it unpalatable....I find that behaviour, and racially derogatory comments completely vile and indefensible.
You say you work with disabled ? Rest bite ?
That would be respite actually.
Thank you spelling police .. It was predictive text and until you pointed it out I hadn't noticed .. Thank you I will correct it now :rolleyes:
Sorry Janna it won't let me correct it .. So you are going to have to deal with it.. And yes until my illness I worked with young adults with severe behavioural problems as well as disabilities .. I will give you the full details I.e. my name ,place of work and ex managers number if you want o confirm this in a PM
We seem to be at cross purposes here. There are two separate conversations going on: one is to do with Harvey's condition and its nature, the other is to do with why KP is seen by some to possibly have some responsibility for it (because of how she behaved during her pregnancy.)
My position is that while I understand the criticism of that behaviour, and no one can say for sure that it didn't impact upon Harvey, I don't see it as grounds to keep on bashing her over it, as I think it's really cruel.