Skip to main content
NCBI home page
American Journal of Public Health logoLink to American Journal of Public Health
. 1999 Nov;89(11):1649–1657. doi: 10.2105/ajph.89.11.1649

Prenatal diagnosis and selective abortion: a challenge to practice and policy.

A Asch 1
PMCID: PMC1508970  PMID: 10553384

Abstract

Professionals should reexamine negative assumptions about the quality of life with prenatally detectable impairments and should reform clinical practice and public policy to improve informed decision making and genuine reproductive choice. Current data on children and families affected by disabilities indicate that disability does not preclude a satisfying life. Many problems attributed to the existence of a disability actually stem from inadequate social arrangements that public health professionals should work to change. This article assumes a pro-choice perspective but suggests that unreflective uses of prenatal testing could diminish, rather than expand, women's choices. This critique challenges the view of disability that lies behind the social endorsement of such testing and the conviction that women will or should end their pregnancies if they discover that the fetus has a disabling trait.

Full text

PDF
1649

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Beaudet A. L. Carrier screening for cystic fibrosis. Am J Hum Genet. 1990 Oct;47(4):603–605. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Botkin J. R. Fetal privacy and confidentiality. Hastings Cent Rep. 1995 Sep-Oct;25(5):32–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cooley W. C., Graham E. S., Moeschler J. B., Graham J. M., Jr Reactions of mothers and medical professionals to a film about Down syndrome. Am J Dis Child. 1990 Oct;144(10):1112–1116. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1990.02150340056023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Davis D. S. Genetic dilemmas and the child's right to an open future. Hastings Cent Rep. 1997 Mar-Apr;27(2):7–15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Evers-Kiebooms G., Denayer L., Van den Berghe H. A child with cystic fibrosis: II. Subsequent family planning decisions, reproduction and use of prenatal diagnosis. Clin Genet. 1990 Mar;37(3):207–215. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1990.tb03504.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Field Martha A. Killing "the handicapped" -- before and after birth. Harv Women's Law J. 1993 Spring;16:79–138. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Green R. M. Parental autonomy and the obligation not to harm one's child genetically. J Law Med Ethics. 1997 Spring;25(1):5-15, 2. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.1997.tb01389.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kuppermann M., Goldberg J. D., Nease R. F., Jr, Washington A. E. Who should be offered prenatal diagnosis? The 35-year-old question. Am J Public Health. 1999 Feb;89(2):160–163. doi: 10.2105/ajph.89.2.160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lippman A. Prenatal genetic testing and screening: constructing needs and reinforcing inequities. Am J Law Med. 1991;17(1-2):15–50. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lippman A., Wilfond B. S. Twice-told tales: stories about genetic disorders. Am J Hum Genet. 1992 Oct;51(4):936–937. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Lipsky D. K. A parental perspective on stress and coping. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1985 Oct;55(4):614–617. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.1985.tb02712.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Ray C., West J. Social, sexual and personal implications of paraplegia. Paraplegia. 1984 Apr;22(2):75–86. doi: 10.1038/sc.1984.15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Saigal S., Feeny D., Rosenbaum P., Furlong W., Burrows E., Stoskopf B. Self-perceived health status and health-related quality of life of extremely low-birth-weight infants at adolescence. JAMA. 1996 Aug 14;276(6):453–459. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Schüklenk U., Stein E., Kerin J., Byne W. The ethics of genetic research on sexual orientation. Hastings Cent Rep. 1997 Jul-Aug;27(4):6–13. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Shaw M. W. Presidential address. To be or not to be? That is the question. Am J Hum Genet. 1984 Jan;36(1):1–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Taanila A., Kokkonen J., Järvelin M. R. The long-term effects of children's early-onset disability on marital relationships. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1996 Jul;38(7):567–577. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1996.tb12121.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Tyson J. E., Broyles R. S. Progress in assessing the long-term outcome of extremely low-birth-weight infants. JAMA. 1996 Aug 14;276(6):492–493. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Van Riper M., Ryff C., Pridham K. Parental and family well-being in families of children with Down syndrome: a comparative study. Res Nurs Health. 1992 Jun;15(3):227–235. doi: 10.1002/nur.4770150309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Walker L. S., Ford M. B., Donald W. D. Cystic fibrosis and family stress: effects of age and severity of illness. Pediatrics. 1987 Feb;79(2):239–246. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Wertz Dorothy C., Fletcher John C. A critique of some feminist challenges to prenatal diagnosis. J Womens Health. 1993;2(2):173–188. doi: 10.1089/jwh.1993.2.173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. White M. T. Making responsible decisions. An interpretive ethic for genetic decisionmaking. Hastings Cent Rep. 1999 Jan-Feb;29(1):14–21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association

RESOURCES