Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Aborting a Down's Syndrome Baby
The title links to an article - "The abortion debate no one wants to have". And actually, I've found some definite resistance to talking about this exact issue, even among liberals. Pro-lifers need not even read past the title to be horrified, but I think that the debate is worthwhile.
The fact of the matter is that it's reality- people are having tests done on their fetuses to find out whether they have (among other things) Down's syndrome, the leading cause of mental retardation in children. It's a quick screening, not too invasive, and it can be detected pretty early. The question is, what would you do if you were faced with the decision?
Deep down, we want our children to be perfect-- healthy, smart, moral, athletic, beautiful, friendly, people. The reality never lives up to that desire. Inevitably, our children turn out to be human, with their own fuck-ups and issues, some that are handed down directly from their own parents, and some that are new to the coming generation. Some are genetic, ranging from physical beauty to a congenital heart defect. And some are cultural. We can't help but screw up our children's lives, but we do try to give them the best of what's available.
And so, to be faced with a disability so early on, before the parents even get used to the idea of having a child, must be a startling choice to make. It may even be so early on that it seems a preventative measure rather than an abortion- we sometimes think of babies as blank slates, so to erase the disability and start over again probably just seems a continuation of the first pregnancy rather than a do-over. And when faced with that rationale, it seems prudent that you would choose to abort the fetus. If a doctor asked if you would like for your baby's second head to be removed, you wouldn't think twice.
But of course this is coming from a decidely pro-choice point of view. And yet, I read what I've written and it seems cold and clinical, as if having a child is simply a matter of buying a kit at Sears and returning it if it doesn't work out. It isn't the abortion itself that bothers me. I have no qualms about the pain of the fetus, the creation of a soul at conception, nor am I worried that I am ending the spark of human life before it has a chance to turn into a fire.
I am pro-choice for a variety of reason, not the least of which is the fact that I think parents should be allowed to choose the circumstances in which they raise their child, so that if they are not ready-- financially, emotionally, mentally, familially (is that a word?), the child will not be the one to suffer.
Of course, there are other significant reasons to be be pro-choice, such as the actual rights of the woman bearing the fetus, and that she should have control over her own body. But I want to ignore this side of the abortion debate for right now- not because it isn't important, but mainly because it isn't what I find distressing about this issue.
Anyway, in this case, ostensibly, the parents want to have a child, but simply don't want THIS child, because of the disability. That's what separates it from a "normal" abortion debate. Aborting the fetus is making a choice about what kind of child the parents want, not just whether they want a child or not. And that is strange, to me. If we extrapolated this scenario, do we come up with a Gattaca-like world in which parents select against all the things they don't want their children to have? Would there never be another Down's syndrome baby? Or, do we simply come up with a more evolved modern world, where genetic diseases are rarer, spotted earlier, and perhaps even cured?
Returning back to the subjective side of the debate, it comes down to the question- should we be able to choose what kind of children we want to have? That power is becoming increasingly available to parents, and it speaks to the perfection that we all want our children to have, especially at birth. At birth, we want to think anything is possible for our children, which is perhaps why a Down's syndrome baby presents a sort of wake up call to reality for that dream. Would anyone think about aborting a paraplegic baby, or a blind one? A deaf one? Probably not most people. What's at issue here is potential.
I think what separates Down's syndrome and other mental afflictions from things like blindness/deafness, is that parents realize that what they want for their children is not simply happiness, but humanity. While people with Down's syndrome can, and have led fulfilling, normal, happy lives, there's the impression, right or wrong, that mentally handicapped people are not getting the full human experience- because they lack the intelligence that they would have had without the extra 21st chromosome. And because our intelligence is what defines our humanity more than any other trait, there's a feeling of your child being cheated out of his or her potential.
I don't want to pretend that I know everything about Down's syndrome, or that I even could guess what it is like to have a Down's syndrome child, but I think I do know what I would do if I were faced with the decision and asked to choose by myself.
I think, at heart, having a child is a optimistic bet on the future. And that deep down desire for our children to be perfect is not an insignificant thing. If we were to think about all the horrible, awful things that could happen to our children, we would be paralyzed in fear. To be faced with the prospect that my child would be mentally handicapped, before it even had a chance in the world, somehow strikes me as going against that fundamental hope. So I think I know what my decision would be.
But by no means do I think that this these should be you reasoning. It strikes at too many personal issues for it to be an issue that can be resolved by reasoning. But I would like to know what you, our dear readers think.
The fact of the matter is that it's reality- people are having tests done on their fetuses to find out whether they have (among other things) Down's syndrome, the leading cause of mental retardation in children. It's a quick screening, not too invasive, and it can be detected pretty early. The question is, what would you do if you were faced with the decision?
Deep down, we want our children to be perfect-- healthy, smart, moral, athletic, beautiful, friendly, people. The reality never lives up to that desire. Inevitably, our children turn out to be human, with their own fuck-ups and issues, some that are handed down directly from their own parents, and some that are new to the coming generation. Some are genetic, ranging from physical beauty to a congenital heart defect. And some are cultural. We can't help but screw up our children's lives, but we do try to give them the best of what's available.
And so, to be faced with a disability so early on, before the parents even get used to the idea of having a child, must be a startling choice to make. It may even be so early on that it seems a preventative measure rather than an abortion- we sometimes think of babies as blank slates, so to erase the disability and start over again probably just seems a continuation of the first pregnancy rather than a do-over. And when faced with that rationale, it seems prudent that you would choose to abort the fetus. If a doctor asked if you would like for your baby's second head to be removed, you wouldn't think twice.
But of course this is coming from a decidely pro-choice point of view. And yet, I read what I've written and it seems cold and clinical, as if having a child is simply a matter of buying a kit at Sears and returning it if it doesn't work out. It isn't the abortion itself that bothers me. I have no qualms about the pain of the fetus, the creation of a soul at conception, nor am I worried that I am ending the spark of human life before it has a chance to turn into a fire.
I am pro-choice for a variety of reason, not the least of which is the fact that I think parents should be allowed to choose the circumstances in which they raise their child, so that if they are not ready-- financially, emotionally, mentally, familially (is that a word?), the child will not be the one to suffer.
Of course, there are other significant reasons to be be pro-choice, such as the actual rights of the woman bearing the fetus, and that she should have control over her own body. But I want to ignore this side of the abortion debate for right now- not because it isn't important, but mainly because it isn't what I find distressing about this issue.
Anyway, in this case, ostensibly, the parents want to have a child, but simply don't want THIS child, because of the disability. That's what separates it from a "normal" abortion debate. Aborting the fetus is making a choice about what kind of child the parents want, not just whether they want a child or not. And that is strange, to me. If we extrapolated this scenario, do we come up with a Gattaca-like world in which parents select against all the things they don't want their children to have? Would there never be another Down's syndrome baby? Or, do we simply come up with a more evolved modern world, where genetic diseases are rarer, spotted earlier, and perhaps even cured?
Returning back to the subjective side of the debate, it comes down to the question- should we be able to choose what kind of children we want to have? That power is becoming increasingly available to parents, and it speaks to the perfection that we all want our children to have, especially at birth. At birth, we want to think anything is possible for our children, which is perhaps why a Down's syndrome baby presents a sort of wake up call to reality for that dream. Would anyone think about aborting a paraplegic baby, or a blind one? A deaf one? Probably not most people. What's at issue here is potential.
I think what separates Down's syndrome and other mental afflictions from things like blindness/deafness, is that parents realize that what they want for their children is not simply happiness, but humanity. While people with Down's syndrome can, and have led fulfilling, normal, happy lives, there's the impression, right or wrong, that mentally handicapped people are not getting the full human experience- because they lack the intelligence that they would have had without the extra 21st chromosome. And because our intelligence is what defines our humanity more than any other trait, there's a feeling of your child being cheated out of his or her potential.
I don't want to pretend that I know everything about Down's syndrome, or that I even could guess what it is like to have a Down's syndrome child, but I think I do know what I would do if I were faced with the decision and asked to choose by myself.
I think, at heart, having a child is a optimistic bet on the future. And that deep down desire for our children to be perfect is not an insignificant thing. If we were to think about all the horrible, awful things that could happen to our children, we would be paralyzed in fear. To be faced with the prospect that my child would be mentally handicapped, before it even had a chance in the world, somehow strikes me as going against that fundamental hope. So I think I know what my decision would be.
But by no means do I think that this these should be you reasoning. It strikes at too many personal issues for it to be an issue that can be resolved by reasoning. But I would like to know what you, our dear readers think.
# posted by Stuart @ 1:15 AM 
