Consider the case of Iceland where prenatal genetic testing for Downs Syndrome is routine. The video notes that Iceland has nearly eliminated Downs Syndrome. This policy helps alleviate the tax burden of caring for disabled persons. (Rationing is essential in a single-payer system.) But when they say Iceland has nearly eliminated Downs Syndrome they are saying that fetuses with Downs Syndrome are routinely aborted. Assess Krass’s arguments for the claim that aborting defective fetuses is morally wrong. Purdy argues that if parents who are at risk of conceiving a defective fetus have a problem with abortion they should opt for pre-implantation screening and discard defective embryos. Critically evaluate Purdy’s argument. McMahan criticizes Kass’s view that disabled fetuses should be placed on par with healthy fetuses. His central argument is that if it is okay to select for health then it should also be okay to select for disability. Yet both McMahan and Davis argue it is wrong to select for disability. More generally, do you think social policies like those in place in Iceland are morally problematic? Defend your answer within the context of the assigned readings.

(Minimum Word Count: 500 Words)

Here are the three readings to replace the readings in your textbook for the module on procreative responsibility.

Kass, The Wisdom of Repugnance

https://web.stanford.edu/~mvr2j/sfsu09/extra/Kass2.pdf (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Laura Purdy, Genetic and Reproductive Risk: Can Having Children be Immoral?

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/610c/1e001ec02c91a4b45b1771038101e6b29ffb.pdf (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Jeff McMahan, The Morality of Screening for Disability

http://jeffersonmcmahan.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Morality-of-Screening-for-Disability1.pdf (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.