  |
|||
|
|
|
||
|
Posted by Joanna Karpasea-Jones Jun 24, 2008 |
The idea of being able to prevent a baby from having a disability seems an honourable one. After all, no parent wants their child to suffer. I am a parent of a child with a genetically inherited condition and there was no embryo screening when I was having my family. I discovered the technique when I was pregnant with my naturally conceived son, and it was a bittersweet moment, knowing that the child I was carrying may be affected but had I realised my treatment options earlier, I may well have been able to guarantee that he was healthy.
However, disability rights groups think differently and some are actually dubbing the procedure as discrimination against the disabled.
Comment on Reproductive Ethics said
'It sends a particularly bad message to children with cystic fibrosis - that society would prefer that they had not been born.'
As a disabled person myself, I find this argument rather weak. I love my daughter and am glad she is here, but if there was a treatment or a way I could have prevented her from inheriting the condition I would have done. I'm sure my mother felt the same way about me. People fix babies with cleft palates and other problems to make them look physically normal. How is that different to selecting a healthy embryo?
Yes, disabled people have the same rights to life and happiness as everyone else, but we should still try to have healthy babies if possible. It's survival of the fittest. Mother animals will leave cubs to die if there is something wrong with them, and I know if I was an animal I'd have been eaten by a lion by now. That is nature.
I think political correctness has gone mad.