http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/13/weekinreview/13harm.html?_r=1&ref=science&oref=slogin“How much choice do you really want to give?” asked Arthur Caplan, chairman of the department of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. “That’s the challenge of prenatal testing to pro-choicers.”
For many women and their partners, the decision to terminate a pregnancy after a prenatal diagnosis of a serious genetic defect can be harrowing, often coming after a painful assessment of their own emotional and financial resources.
And there is widespread support for such an option: 70 percent of Americans said they believe that women should be able to obtain a legal abortion if there is a strong chance of a serious defect in the baby, according to a 2006 poll conducted by the National Opinion Research Center.
“This issue underscores the importance of families making personal, private decisions without political interference,” said Nancy Keenan, president of Naral Pro-Choice America, in a statement. “The decision should be with women, their families, and their doctors.”
SOAP BOX TIME: UNLESS AND UNTIL THE STATE IS WILLING TO ASSUME ALL THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH BIRTHING AND RAISING A DISABLED CHILD, THE CHOICE REMAINS WITH THE MOTHER. AS A MOTHER OF A DISABLED CHILD, WHO I LOVE AND PROTECT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITIES AND RESOURCES, FOR WHOM I HAVE SACRIFICED MOST OF MY DREAMS AND WISHES TO MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE HER LIFE, INCLUDING THE CHANCE FOR OTHER CHILDREN, I HAVE A REASON TO KNOW, NOT GUESS, NOT AGONIZE. I KNOW.