In the world we live in today, profit
is a driving force. As selective abortion becomes more and more routine,
parents might be forced into aborting their “defective” children. The insurance
companies will say to parents that they are on their own when the decision to
bring a disabled child into the world is made and will refuse to pay for health
care. At this present time the screening is concentrated on searching and
destroying Down syndrome. Eventually it could be for blindness or even brown
eyes. The termination of the lives of people with disabilities in any form,
even suicide, has many negative ramifications. When a society sanctions the
termination of the lives of people with disabilities the lives of all human
beings are cheapened and devalued.
Human life begins at conception and all human life
should be valued.
For the sake of not writing an entire volume on the subject
of selective abortion, only one argument will be explored in this text. A
pro-choice stance differentiates between the concept of personhood and the
concept of human life. Human life occurs at conception, but personhood occurs
when a fetus has the ability to exist independently without the aid of the
mother’s placenta and the umbilical cord. Therefore the human fetus has not yet
achieved personhood and is not entitled to the same rights and protections
under the law.
The rationalization that a fetus
cannot exist independently outside the mother’s womb is not a practical and
constant argument. The problem is that with advances in medical technology the
point at which a fetus can live on its own has become earlier and earlier
during the gestation. At first glance the pro-choice argument seems to be
limited to unborn children. Even a full term baby cannot survive on its own
without supports. Should the independent existence test be then applied to
young infants? During every stage of development humans need supports to
thrive. This interconnectedness is part of what makes human beings human.
People with disabilities can survive and thrive when they are given the proper
supports that they need.
One never knows the potential that a
person has. All fetuses and infants have potential. When parents abort a fetus they
are in danger of extinguishing the life of a person that could have grown up to
be of great importance to society. Even when humans are still in utero, they
are still humans in a different stage of development. Whether a human being is
young or old, it is about personal development and leaving a positive footprint
on the world. People with even severe disabilities are capable of doing both of
those things.
The assertion of the Supreme Court in the Roe vs. Wade
decision was that viability occurs at about seven months or 28 weeks. This
assertion has been challenged by medical improvements over the past 38 years.
A Swedish study in 2009
found that preterm babies born late in the second trimester who
are given intensive
care survive at surprising rates: 53% of those born at 23 weeks live, 67%
at 24 weeks, and by 25 weeks, 82% of the babies
survive (Osler).
There are so many examples of people that have disabilities
that have been totally dependent on supports to live yet they were still able
to leave a positive footprint on the world. I personally had the privilege of
knowing one of those individuals. My friend could not walk, talk, or even
breathe on his own. But with the supports of a motorized wheelchair, computer,
and a ventilation devise he was able to survive and thrive. He managed to
positively change the worlds of everyone around him. His biological mother was
very young and decided that she could not provide for all of his special needs.
His foster parents adopted him and I was able to witness how he transformed
them into better people. He was expected to only live till he was 10 years old.
Just after his 21st birthday I was able to meet and talk with a
chapel full of people attending his funeral that he was able to touch in his
short life. My friend could not live independently of supports yet he was able
to leave an enormously positive footprint in this world.
The value of a human life is not determined by the degree in which a person fits into the socially constructed boundaries of normalcy.
The people that support selective
abortion and terminating the lives of people with disabilities are not monsters.
Most have good intentions. The belief is that terminating the life of a human
that has a disability is a humane act that is what is best for the child and for
society as a whole. There is an argument that a child with a disability will
never lead a normal and productive life. It is cruel to subject anyone to the pain,
suffering, and hardship that accompanies living a life with a disability.
People that take this position believe that it is hard enough to succeed
without a disability. The thought of not being “normal” is terrifying to them.
Many of the people that support termination believe that they would rather die
than become a person with a disability and they find it hard to believe that
anyone would feel otherwise. There is a prevalent belief that their lives would
suddenly have no meaning and no value. The question that cannot be fathomed is
how could anyone live like that? The argument that people with disabilities
have nothing valuable to contribute and are a burden to society is also a
predominate argument given in support of the termination of fetuses that have
disabilities. Although I do not agree
with the contention that fetuses diagnosed with a disability should be aborted,
I concede that the argument for it has a compassionate, socially conscience
background.
People with red hair fall outside of
the statistical norms of society. Even in the countries with the highest
populations of red-headed people, there are between 10 and 30 percent. There is
only one percent of the total population that has natural red hair. This small
representation of the general population qualifies the genetic traits that
cause red hair to be labeled as an abnormality. Mutations in the MC1R gene
deposits more melanin (eumelanin and pheomelanin) in the hair and skin which
causes both red hair and freckles. Redheaded people almost always have lighter
skin than most other people. The lighter skin leads to a higher risk for
sunburns which leads to skin cancer. There are some advantages to being a
redhead. The countries that have higher populations of redheads have rainy
climates and sparse sunlight. Fair skin allows for better absorption of the
essential vitamin D from the sunlight. People that have red hair are more
sensitive to thermal pain. They also need more anesthetic for pain relief than people
without red hair do. In short, people with red hair live shorter lives and
experience more pain than “normal” people do.
Historically redheads have been
labeled as having hot and short tempers. Those are traits that are not valued
in some societies. "Red hair, a
red beard, and ruddy skin - separately or combined - have been considered
suspect, impure, and dangerous because they did not meet the standards of the
normal... (Mellinkoff, 147)” During the middle ages in the Christian dominated portions of
Europe considered people with red hair to be untrustworthy. Even more dangerous
was the predominate belief that red hair was a sign of witchcraft which lead to
the lives of many red-headed people to be terminated.
What does being born with red hair
have to do with aborting fetuses that have disabilities? Similar to the genetic mutations that cause
red hair, Down syndrome is a congenital, chromosomal abnormality/defect that
makes people look different than “normal” people. Down syndrome can be found in
less than 1% of the population which places them well outside the protective
confines of normalcy. People with Down syndrome can also expect to have an
increased risk for disabilities and diseases that cause pain, and shorten their
life span. There are many misconceptions that people with Down syndrome impose
a great burden and pose a danger to society. Diagnostic in utero screening for Down
syndrome has become a common practice. At minimum 85% of fetuses diagnosed with
Down syndrome end up being aborted (Will, 1). Their parents believe that they
are doing the kind, compassionate thing and that they are lessening the burden
to themselves and society. Recognizing the similarities between hair color and
having an extra 21st chromosome makes me wonder if the people of the
Middle Ages had the technology to screen for abnormally redheaded fetuses,
would they have aborted more than 85% of them too?
Deborah Kent’s mother realized that
Deborah was blind when she was only a few weeks old. Deborah’s parents were
frequently described as “wonderful” for raising her “like a normal” child. For
other people being normal meant not having a disability like blindness. For
Deborah being blind was normal. Deborah Kent wrote “Blindness presented
occasional complications, but seldom kept me from anything I wanted to do
(Kent, 57).” Deborah does not fit within the statistical norm yet she leads a
very productive happy life. Being “normal” is a social construct that changes
depending on the vantage point. Redheaded people are still a minority, but
society no longer subjects them to witch hunts and it is believed that they can
also lead very productive and happy lives. Has the genetic makeup and potential
of redheads changed or has societal viewpoints changed? Prenatal screenings for
Down syndrome are the modern day witch hunts that hopefully with the passage of
time and enlightenment will be abolished.
Jon Will was born with an extra 21st
chromosome and is diagnosed as having Down syndrome. He has outlived and
outperformed the expectations of society. The value that society places on a
humans that are different changes with enlightenment. The life expectancy of people with Down
syndrome has more than doubled in the last 25 years. Jon’s father George F.
Will attributes that growth to the increase in the care and acceptance of
people like Jon. No one really knows the potential of people that have
disabilities like Down syndrome. Who really is in a position to say that Jon’s
life is of any less value than any other’s?
Jon experiences life’s three elemental
enjoyments—loving, being loved and ESPN. For Jon,
as for most normal American males, the rest of life is
details (Will, 2).
Effects on human beings-
Many people that support the termination of people with
disabilities believe that nobody is hurt by it. There is a belief that everyone
involved, including the person being terminated, is better off for it. Society
is better off because disabled people are not capable people that can
contribute to building a better world. People with disabilities are liabilities
that drain already scarce resources. If there are fewer people with
disabilities in the world then there could be more resources allocated to
support special education and other programs designed to help those who need
it. The families benefit because they are no longer yoked with a heavy burden.
It is financially, emotionally, physically, and spiritually burdensome to care
for a person that has a disability. This type of burden causes a lot of stress
that destroy families. Finally it is the
humane thing to do. People with disabilities should be spared from the pain,
ridicule, and frustration that comes from the struggles they face.
Societal definition of what it means
to be a capable person that contributes to building a better world is a person
that can successfully navigate their way through the school system and go on to
make money and provide others with the opportunity to do the same. With that
narrow and shallow view of what it means to be successful, people with
disabilities do tend to fall short. But is that really fair? There are a myriad of different ways that any person,
even with severe disabilities, can benefit society.
Twelve years ago a friend of mine had
a stroke that left her without the ability to speak and think clearly. She had
a very difficult time with changes in her life and how people treated her
differently. She felt like a burden even though she continued to work out in
the fields with her husband on the family farm.
Her family did not feel like she was a burden. They loved and valued
her. Her family grew and became closer because of her disability. Her oldest
son was involved in an accident that resulted in a head injury. He struggled
with some of the same communicative issues that his mother did. He commented
that his mother inspired him to work through his difficulties. Recently my
friend veered off the road while driving, hit a tree, and shortly thereafter
passed away. At first it was thought that she had another stroke, but it
appears that she committed suicide. Living with her disability inspired and
brought her family together, terminating her own life has divided and
devastated them.
Many individuals with disabilities do
experience pain, ridicule, and frustration. That is a part of the human
experience. Each individual experiences all of those things over the course of
a lifetime. For people with disabilities it is not the disabilities that are
the problem, the problem is the lack of supports available to them.
The termination of lives of people that have disabilities
sends the message that having a disability is undesirable. “Those” people who have disabilities are not
valued and have nothing to offer (Kent, 59). Deborah Kent’s doctor after telling
her that she could pass her genetic blindness onto her children added some wise
council that contradicted society’s view of bring children with disabilities
into the world.
“You have a good life, don’t you?” he asked. “If you
have a child with Leber’s, it can have a good life too.
Go home and have a dozen kids if you want to!” (Kent,
60)
Those words from Deborah’s doctor made her feel like a
valuable human being that had worthwhile traits to pass on to her children.
Lisa Blumberg also writes about how allowing Baby Doe (Bloomington baby) to die
just because he had an extra chromosome sent a chilling message to all people
that have disabilities.
The Bloomington baby lived our collective nightmare in
more ways than one. His parent, regretting that
he had even seen the light of day and choosing to doom
him, declined to give him a name. So he became
Baby Doe, and then later a baby doe as the media
adopted that shorthand term to refer to a whole underclass
of babies, the value of whose lives were speculative. Conundrum:
If a baby doe is allowed to grow up,
do we have an adult doe?
A society that sanctions or promotes the
termination of the lives of people that are “different” or deemed not “normal” denigrates
the value of all human beings. Just not
participating or condoning such practices is not enough. There needs to be a
society-wide shift in how people with disabilities are viewed. That daunting
task can happen if people will stop sitting idly by and boldly stand-up to
“sing” for the mockingbird that is in the place where nobody thought it
belonged (Kent, 63).
Reference
List:
Blumberg, L. (July/August, 2000). The
natural destiny of the Bloomington Baby. Ragged
Edge
Magazine.
Everybody is a genius. Digital
Image. All Inspiring Quotes: A blog about Inspirational quotes and
inspiring
stories. Web. 10 October2014. http://allinspiringquotes.blogspot.com/2013/06/everybody-is-genius-but-if-you-judge.html.
Kent, D. (2000). Somewhere a
mockingbird. In E. Parens and A. Asch (Eds.). Prenatal
testing and disability
rights (pp. 57-63). Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Press.
Mellinkoff, Ruth. Outcasts: Signs of
Otherness in Northern European Art of the Late Middle
Ages. Vol. 1. Los
Angeles: U of California, 1994. Print.
Osler, Mark. "CNN.com - Breaking
News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment ..." CNN. CNN, 1
Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/01/opinion/osler-abortion-viability/>.
"The Genetic Causes, Ethnic Origins
and History of Red Hair." Ed. Eupedia. Eupedia. N.p., n.d.
Web.
26 Oct. 2014. http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/origins_of_red_hair.shtml
Will, G. F. (January 29, 2007). Will:
The attack on kids with Down Syndrome.
Newsweek.
No comments:
Post a Comment