51
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2026
51 points (82.3% liked)
Asklemmy
54916 readers
408 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
What you're asking about is eugenics. People with downs syndrome can lead rewarding lives. Many people who work with those of us with downs say that they have the highest satisfaction with life of anyone out there. They do require a lot of costly and time consuming care in early life, but there is no reason a child born with downs can't have a life they find fulfilling.
Given that, I would say if a mother's only reason for aborting is the downs syndrome, that probably leans towards unethical. However if there are any other reasons a mother might choose to abort that fetus, it's ethical. But terminating a pregnancy because the child has an "undesirable" trait is both eugenics and ableism which rarely result in ethical decision making.
Even under the umbrella of downs syndrome being the only reason, I think there's variability. "I won't be able to take care of this child" is quite different from "This child has an undesirable trait."
Is it ethical to abort a child with any kind of disease/syndrome that requires more resources, time, and money than the parents can afford? If we had rephrased it as an adoption, it would be inarguable child abuse for a couple to adopt a special needs child they have no capability of raising.
I don't disagree with you. Unwanted children do not have happy outcomes, especially those with disabilities. However if you are applying the logic of adoption to that of eugenics you should tread carefully. If society is allowed to impose restrictions on adoptions, why not biological parents? Perhaps pregnant women should have an income test? If a mother can't afford to feed her child should she be allowed to retain custody or have the baby at all?
If a pregnant person decides they cannot afford it or aren't up for the commitment that's ethical. If a pregnant person decided to abort out of some pity for people with downs, well that's eugenics and ableist, so probably unethical. Pragmatically though the result is the same.
Personally I interpreted the question as an individuals dilemma, I never intended for it to be a societal, or government sweeping legislation or expectation to abort any fetus with disabilities, just whether or not it was ethical for an individuals decision to abort. I dont think government or law should exist at all, so I wouldnt support any government restrictions on reproductive rights