Everworse: What's Wrong with Selecting for Disability?

Public Affairs Quarterly 25 (2):131-140 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In this paper we challenge the moral consensus against selection for disability. Our discussion will concern only those disabilities that are compatible with a life worth living from the point of view of the disabled individual. We will argue that an influential, impersonal argument against selection for disability falls to a counterexample. We will then show how the reach of the counterexample can be broadened to make trouble for anyone who objects to selection for disability. If we are right about the problems for objections to selection for disability, why are objections are so widespread? We suggest that intuitions are being skewed against selection for disability by certain quirks in the usual ways of presenting the issue. Nevertheless, we must confess to finding our own result surprising



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,378

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

188 (#94,140)

6 months
5 (#237,855)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark Edward Greene
University of Delaware

Citations of this work

A harm based solution to the non-identity problem.Molly Gardner - 2015 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 2:427-444.
On the Strength of the Reason Against Harming.Molly Gardner - 2017 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 14 (1):73-87.
The Asymmetry, Uncertainty, and the Long Term.Teruji Thomas - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (2):470-500.
How Lives Measure Up.Molly Gardner & Justin Weinberg - 2013 - Acta Analytica 28 (1):31-48.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The paradox of future individuals.Gregory S. Kavka - 1982 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 11 (2):93-112.
The Indeterminacy of Loss.Mark Greene - 2008 - Ethics 118 (4):633-658.

Add more references