Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):463-484 (2002)

It is now a common opinion in Western countries that a child's impairment would probably place an unexpected burden on her parents, a burden that the parents have not committed themselves to dealing with. Therefore, selective abortion is in general a morally justified option for the parents. I argue that this view is based on biased information about the quality of life of individuals with impairments and their families. Also, a conscious decision to procreate should bring about conscious assent to assuming obligations as a parent. This implies a duty of caring for any kind of child. Consequently, if the child's condition is not such that it would make its life not worth living, and if the parents live in an environment where they are able to provide their child and themselves an adequate well-being, they do not have a morally sufficient reason to terminate the pregnancy on the grounds of fetal abnormality.
Keywords assent  disability  impairment  moral responsibility  parenthood  prenatal diagnosis  selective abortion
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1023/A:1021367025543
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,636
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Possibility of a Duty to Love.Barbara P. Solheim - 1999 - Journal of Social Philosophy 30 (1):1-17.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Genetic Moralism and Health.Tuija Takala - 2019 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 28 (2):225-235.
Live and Let Die? Disability in Bioethics.Simo Vehmas - 2003 - New Review of Bioethics 1 (1):145-157.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
135 ( #81,615 of 2,462,239 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #223,271 of 2,462,239 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes