Natural

Down syndrome is a naturally occurring phenomenon in the human population. This genetic condition can be found across cultures, genders, and socio-economic levels. It occurs in approximately 1 out of every 800 births, so it clearly represents a natural component of humanity. For people with Down syndrome, the genetic condition does not define them, but it is inherently a part of them much like race or sexual preference.

The Debate

The Down syndrome community has struggled to react to the ACOG recommendation that all women be offered pre-natal screening for Down syndrome. The reason this suggestion was problematic in the Down syndrome community was because many expectant parents receive outdated, negative information about Down syndrome. Therefore, members of the Down syndrome community sought to provide physicians with more updated information to convey that the life of a person with Down syndrome is worthwhile. This was particularly vital since there is a reported 90% abortion rate for babies with Down syndrome.

As a result, the reaction of the Down syndrome community was immediately seized upon as part of the abortion debate. Unquestionably, the majority of individuals in the Down syndrome community argue that they want to properly educate expectant parents about the improved quality of life for people with Down syndrome so that expectant parents can make an informed choice whether to continue the pregnancy or not. Yet, there is also an undercurrent in the Down syndrome community suggesting that eliminating a part of the population based on genetic screening is a discriminatory practice with eugenic undertones.

So, the question emerges: can people ethically disagree with the reason why a woman has an abortion without engaging in the abortion debate about whether or not abortion should be allowed at all?

To me, it is similar to arguing about whether what someone says is ethical or not while still fundamentally recognizing the right to free speech.