"The Problem With An Almost-Perfect Genetic World"

Genetic testing early in pregnancy leads to many abortions. For those of us with deep convictions that abortion is wrong in nearly all cases, that's enough of a yellow flag raised against such testing (not a red flag, of course, because there are useful medical benefits to it). The New York Times this week has uncovered additional issues.

To quote:

"But for people with Down syndrome and the cluster of other conditions subject to prenatal screening, the new test comes with a certain chill.

"Because such tests often lead to abortions, people with conditions from mental disability to cystic fibrosis may find their numbers dwindling. As a result, some fear, their lives may become harder just as they are winning the fight for greater inclusion.

"'We're trying to make a place for ourselves in society at a time when science is trying to remove at least some of us,'said Andrew Imparato, president of the American Association of People With Disabilities, who suffers from bipolar disorder. 'For me, it's very scary.'"

As well it should be. Another way to read the possible future is, "Everyone like you may be killed before birth, just because of what they have in common with you. Some parents will do it 'for the sake of the baby,' some for their own convenience. Either way you're all dead." (Does this bear any relation to genocide? I haven't thought it through; I'm just wondering.)

Continuing:

"Some bioethicists envision a dystopia where parents who choose to forgo genetic testing are shunned, or their children are denied insurance. Parents and people with disabilities fear they may simply be more lonely. And less money may be devoted to cures and education."

And . . .

"Of course, as more conditions are diagnosed in utero, many parents may simply decline testing, or use the information to prepare themselves. But studies have shown that women are considerably more likely to terminate their pregnancies if they know of fetal anomalies."

Up to 50% of women whose prenatal testing shows a genetic issue that may cause "serious impact" abort the pregnancy. That's considered a "personal" decision, but as this article illustrates, there is no such thing as a purely personal decision. No woman is an island, to paraphrase Donne.

What a hard decision that must be, though! I'm sure if my wife and I were faced with raising (for example) a severely retarded child, we would cry a lot, we would ask why, we would be angry, we would be perplexed and overwhelmed--and we would raise our child with all the love we could.

I have one topic yet to cover in the "Is God Good" series, on the place of suffering in our lives. One thing I can say briefly is that it either draws people into growth and community, or else into bitterness. It's one way we find out how much we need God, and how much he can do through us when we trust him with what seems impossible.

P.S. Update at 10:40 am: Mere Comments also touches on this article, including:

"That intelligence makes life worth living, or a baby's life worth saving, is an idea that easily extends to those for whom it was not originally intended. If the retarded can be aborted because they are retarded, what about those — if a genetic test for inteligence is ever perfected — who are merely on the upper left slope of the Bell Curve as a matter of genetics?

"And for that matter, what about those who are merely average, and will grow up to have dull jobs and financial struggles and never appreciate Faulkner or Picasso or Thai food? Why should not concerned parents spare them such a life, if intelligence is so important?"

Posted: Tue - November 22, 2005 at 10:00 AM |

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson getCategoryName("<$CategoryUUID$>");

"The Problem With An Almost-Perfect Genetic World"

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson