The morality of screening for disability.
Many people object to preimplantation or prenatal screening for disability on the grounds that it is discriminatory, has pernicious effects on the lives of existing disabled people, expresses a hurtful view of disabled people, and reduces human diversity. I argue that if these objections are held to be strong enough to show that screening is wrong, they must also imply the permissibility of causing oneself to have a disabled rather than a non-disabled child. Indeed, those who object to screening on these grounds and also claim that it is not worse to be disabled than not to be, seem to be committed to accepting the permissibility of deliberately causing disabling prenatal injury, even for frivolous reasons. If we cannot accept these implications, we cannot accept that the objections to screening show that it is wrong.
McMahan
Jeff
J
Department of Philosophy, Rutgers University, 26 Nichol Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-2882, USA. JMcMahan@Princeton.edu
D006233:Persons with Disabilities; D026690:Ethics, Clinical; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005260:Female; D030342:Genetic Diseases, Inborn / Q000517:prevention & control*; D006801:Humans; D009014:Morals; D011247:Pregnancy; D019836:Preimplantation Diagnosis / Q000941:ethics*; D011287:Prejudice; D011296:Prenatal Diagnosis / Q000941:ethics*