I want to delve into a dangerous topic. I want to talk about abortion and eugenics.
Even when abortion was illegal, it was sometimes performed legally in hospitals if the pregnant person was at risk of death, or if they were disabled. People with Down Syndrome sometimes found themselves forced into hospitals to have their pregnancies terminated, often against their will. Then abortion was legalized and I will say, flat-out that this was a good thing.
I believe in free, unlimited access to legal, safe abortion. Whether you believe life begins at conception or at birth, you still have no say over somebody else’s bodily autonomy. It is abhorrent to force somebody to carry a pregnancy to term if they don’t want it. Especially considering what a toll pregnancy has on a body. Also, legislating abortion only increases the number of unsafe, back alley abortions, with more and more people becoming injured or dying by coat hangers and knitting needles. Abortion needs to be safe and legal and accessible, full stop.
Over the last few decades there has been a rise in availability of pre-natal testing. Sonograms and amniocentesis leads to pregnant people finding out sooner and more frequently if their fetus has an impairment or a genetic disorder. Since genetic testing has become more available, the number of abortions due to “defect” are on the rise. Fetuses that are screened and found to have Down Syndrome or spina bifida are being aborted more and more, with promises from doctors and nurses that the parents can always “try again.”
Over the past few decades more and more money is going into genetic autism research, in the effort to create a test to reveal whether or not a fetus will become an autistic person.
Aborting a fetus simply because of impairment or disease is eugenics.
Pro-choice advocates often say things like “forcing a woman to carry a disabled fetus to term is abuse,” with emphasis placed on the idea that disabled children are burdens on their parents and society. They talk about “quality of life” of both the parents and the potential child, but usually weighted more to the parents. This is all ableist rhetoric. To be entirely honest, all children are “burdens” in that they need to be taken care of and protected and housed and fed and clothed without being able to contribute to society. But we don’t usually tell parents that all their healthy, able-bodied kids are burdens, do we? We call children “gifts” and “treasures.”
Anti-choice advocates often say things like “Disabled children are a gift from God! They’re a blessing!” But this is ableist rhetoric too. It dehumanizes disabled children, turns them into objects and life lessons. Disabled children are human beings just like everyone else, with gifts and faults.
When a pregnant person is told by the doctors that their fetus is disabled or has a genetic disorder, they hear a lot of ableist rhetoric. They’re told by doctors that their future child will have no quality of life. That they’ll be a burden. That they’ll suffer. That their life is basically worthless. Doctors often urge and wheedle and even bully pregnant patients into terminating disabled fetuses. They are told that even if they follow through with the pregnancy but give the baby up for adoption–because they can’t afford to take care of a special needs child–the child will likely not be adopted because “nobody wants a broken child.”
So where do we draw the line? Do we make it illegal to terminate a disabled fetus? No. That sets us down a slippery slope and then it’s only a short trip from “some fetuses can’t be terminated” to “no abortion for anyone,” which leads us right back to back-alley knitting needle abortions.
Do we limit access to pregnancy screenings? Maybe. In India, when more and more couples were aborting fetuses determined to be female due to institutionalized sexism and misogyny, they made it illegal, as of 1994, to find out the sex of your child during pregnancy. But that could also lead us down a slippery slope. After all, parents are entitled to be prepared for what’s coming next right? And especially in regards to genetic diseases like Tay-Sach’s, where the child will be in excruciating pain and suffering, and then die by age four, isn’t it sometimes kinder to know? I’m not sure, this is an ethical discussion that I’m not sure I’m qualified to make a definitive ruling on.
Here’s what I think should happen. I think that when a pregnant person discovers their child has an impairment or genetic disorder, they need to be immediately educated. They should be given research into the condition, and introduced to living adults who have the condition in question. Not just parents who believe their disabled child is a burden, but living adults who can tell their own stories about growing up with the condition in question, and give voice to their own quality of life. Pregnant people should be encouraged to make informed, educated decisions, not just jump at their doctors suggestions uninformed.
Also, we need increased access to support systems and services. It should be a lot easier than it is to take care of a “special needs” child and raise them to be an independent adult.
We need to destroy the systemic ableism that tells us disabled people are burdens, disabled people are pitiable, disabled people suffer, disabled people can never be healthy and happy and live long successful lives. We also need to destroy the idea that quality of life is determined by accomplishment and productivity.
Also, please remember that doctors are not the be-all, end-all definitive voice of what is. A doctor’s opinion is an educated OPINION. Feel encouraged to get a second opinion and to do your own research.
Our enemy is not disability. Our enemy is not abortion. Our enemy is ignorance and oppression and a society that benefits from racist, sexist, ableist exploitation and oppression.
annaxmalina
baratheonpilled
turnnoffyourmind
dededos
ellievsbear
discoholicmusic
jbbartram-illu
