[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]

/b/ - Random

Name
Email
Message

*Text* => Text

**Text** => Text

***Text*** => Text

[spoiler]Text[/spoiler] => Text

Verification
Image
Direct Link
Options NSFW image
Sage (thread won't be bumped)

Use REPORTS. Posting 'Mods pls' achieves nothing.
Check the Catalog before making a new thread.
Do not respond to maleposters. See Rule 7.
Please read the rules! Last update: 04/27/2021

7CF7C19A-441A-419F…

Is it ableist to abort a disabled fetus? Anonymous 83269

What do you guys think of aborting a child if you know it will be greatly disabled? Most feminist circles I’ve been in have been against it because it’s ableist. However, I’m watching a documentary on disability and a lot of these moms have to dedicate their entire lives to caring for their kids well past adulthood. They all look like they’ve had their souls sucked out of them.

Anonymous 83271

It makes sense to get rid of something which may as well not be alive. If not for your own sake as the mother then for mercy upon the child

Anonymous 83272

>>83269
Regardless of what is believed to the be the 'moral' stance, if it is allowed it will happen. I believe Sweden and Iceland have almost eliminated new generations of Down's Syndrome because the prospective mothers simply choose not to have the child.

It's very difficult for me to think about. I don't think anyone should be obligated to pour such a huge amount of time and resources into caring for their child, but the conclusion of that seems to be that people simply don't have disabled children. So we have chosen not to allow life with disability, and that probably comes with a commensurate reduction in services/greater stigma for the children still born unexpectedly with a disability. Neither of these seems good.

Anonymous 83273

Aborting a child who will live a very difficult life and will cause the lives of those around them to be difficult is best for everyone involved IMO. I've never been pregnant so I can't say I know how it feels to give up on a baby you've invested so much into, but I think I would abort if put into this situation.

Anonymous 83276

It'd be better if the child could simply be fixed with a little genetic alteration, but until that technology is safe and available, abortion is really the only choice available to spare both parents and child from a life of constant indignity, pain and toil.

Anonymous 83279

>>83269
Isn't this a slippery slope?

Anonymous 83280

C42DA795-ADA5-4F2E…

>>83269
>is it ableist?
yes, and that’s a good thing.

Anonymous 83282

>>83269
Ableism is such a joke. I honestly think you should be able to put down babies/people with certain disabilities after they're born. The kind where they are basically just a lifeless husk that will never meaningfully participate in life.

Anonymous 83283

>>83282
I say after because some things aren't detectable before birth. We also shouldn't force people with equivalently severe brain damage to stay alive either.

Anonymous 83285

>>83269
Yes and Ableism is good.

Anonymous 83286

>>83276
This. The morality piece with abortion makes me feel a bit gross about being pro-choice but it’s honestly the best option until designer babies become the norm. Let it die

Anonymous 83287

>>83269
Do it. My aunt has a kid with Down Syndrome and the fallout immeasurably reduced her quality of life. She looks after her well, but the kid (now adult) is constantly sick (in and out of hospitals) and depressed.

Anonymous 83290

Without going into too much into logical fallacies and stressing the importance that everyone has free will to do with what they what I will state the following:
It does concern me that it is a type of eugenics by weeding out the “undesirables”. Like what >>83272 said about Iceland and Sweden.
Before I go on let me make it very clear that Iceland and Sweden do not practice forced abortions or actual eugenics. This is all happening by choice and the population is freely choosing eugenics.
Also, it can potentially create a Gattaca-like future. If you were to poor to get the fetus aborted, then you suffer even more.
There are some bioethics here that is beyond just a women’s right to choose.
Now is this Darwin’s survival of the fittest?
Perhaps.
All I can personally say is I know what I would do for myself which wouldn’t be the same as for some other women. To that I would also say it’s just best to mind you’re own business.

Anonymous 83291

>>83290
Stupid auto correct it’s *too.

Anonymous 83292

Eugenics is woman's business

Anonymous 83295

Until society creates enough resources for the needs of greatly disabled people to be met (without expecting the mother to devote all of her remaining life to looking after them), it's not inhumane to abort them.

Anonymous 83297

>>83295
There's already enough resources, the issue is distribution

Anonymous 83300

>>83273
It is still possible for many disabilities for those with them to live a fulfilling life.

Anonymous 83302

>Most feminist circles I’ve been in have been against it because it’s ableist.
Then they aren’t feminist. No woman should be forced to carry a fetus they don’t want. That’s psychological torture.

Anonymous 83303

>>83302
Using feminist as just thing good instead of using it to refer to a specific family of thought is dumb

Anonymous 83304

>>83290
>Before I go on let me make it very clear that Iceland and Sweden do not practice forced abortions or actual eugenics. This is all happening by choice and the population is freely choosing eugenics.
In this regard there is no difference between the two. Iceland is de facto practicing eugenics even if it isn't de jure.

Anonymous 83305

>>83304
But eugenics is literally a good thing, if it's done by women.

Anonymous 83310

>>83303
“Feminism” isn’t an identical set of beliefs. There are core values, among which one is bodily autonomy. Someone who doesn’t believe a woman should control her own body will not be accepted as a feminist by most people who identify as feminist.

Anonymous 83311

>>83310
There are plenty of self identified feminists who would say it's ableist to abort disabled children (they're wrong and dumb but that doesn't mean they're not feminists) and they're coming at the issue from an ideological perspective similar enough to other forms of feminism. Like you wouldn't call lib fems who support troons not feminists just because they're idiots but suddenly someone has a bad take about abortion and now they're not feminist. You're using feminist as a value judgment instead of as a way to categorize ideologies. I'm not saying it's bad to abort disabled fetuses, I'm saying it's disingenuous to deny that some of the people who do this re still technically feminist unless your definition of feminist requires them to have consistently correct takes about the relevant issues

Anonymous 83323

>>83311
Troons also self-identify as feminists. There are certain issues where having certain takes is in direct opposition to women’s rights. I do not believe that any woman who supports a defective fetus over a woman’s right to bodily autonomy is a feminist. What they choose to call themselves is a different matter.

Anonymous 83418

Personally I don't believe in abortions with conditions, I'm autistic and having a child with any kind of disability/medical condition is always going to be harder especially because of money, if someone doesn't have the means to provide that child with the resources they'd need and are considering it then yeah an abortion is always an option

Anonymous 83430

>>83282
I agree. I've watched videos of very disabled kids that suffer daily and I don't see the point.

Anonymous 83438

>>83290
It's a good thing period.

Anonymous 83441

I'd say aborting ADHD and HFA/Asperger's kids, or other not life-ruining stuff is dumb if you wanted to have children anyway, but in general i think that children with down syndrome, LFA, and retardation in general should be aborted.

Anonymous 83443

>>83269
>>83269
>Most feminist circles I’ve been in have been against it because it’s ableist.
You're baiting right? There is no way anyone thinks this…How can you support the right to choose except in the cases of disabled fetuses, lmao
Anyway you're right. Having a kid with a great disability (I assume you mean some kind of severe mental handicap or something else requiring lifelong care) is basically forfeiting your life. And for what? The goal of any parent should be to have their child spread their wings and live a happy independent life, that is the culmination of a parent's years of work. Well, that and passing on your genes…nuff said.

83468

>>83290
I believe that not aborting a disabled child is a bad thing, if it prevents you from having another healthy child. I only care about the total wellbeing, not about the wellbeing of individuals.

Anonymous 83469

>>83468
Total wellbeing of what, all of humanity?

83470

mixed-london-mums.…

>>83469
All of humanity, the city, the family, etc.

Anonymous 83471

>>83468
If you prioritize the wellbeing of every level except the individual, what makes the individual suddenly not matter? Individuals are the building blocks of all of these.

Anonymous 83472

>>83471
meant for >>83470

83482

>>83471
As I've said, the wellbeing of the individual matters as long as it doesn't restrict other people, like a disabled child would.

Anonymous 83483

>>83471
Fetuses aren't people, just because something has the potential to become a person doesn't mean that it is one, otherwise condoms are mass murder

Anonymous 83484

>>83483
I don't think the severely mentally disabled are people either tbh

Anonymous 83485

>>83484
I'd feel pretty bad about killing a chimp eve if it's basically mentally equivalent to a retard though

Anonymous 83487

>>83485
A chimp isn't a retard. A chimp has everything it needs to be self sufficient in the proper habitat and live it's own full chimp life. Full retards and other severely disabled, like the kind that can't even communicate or care for themselves on any level aren't like animals. The animal equivalent of them would die in the wild immediately. They're disturbing, like blobs of confusion and suffering that shouldn't be alive, but we force them to keep breathing.

Anonymous 83488

>>83483
Sperm do not contains embryos tho. Contraception and abortion, on moral terms, are completely different matters.

To stay on topic, I don't understand the stigma against eugenics, especially when they're not enforced by any means. Is it because "le evil natzees" practiced a specific kind of forced eugenics, that as a consequence, all form of eugenics become monstruous ? If it comes to this, this is just dumb.
Eugenics are a way to weed out debilitating disabilites, that cause a lot of suffering, and that are also costly for society as a whole. Care and health workers that look after disabled people, as well as their families (mothers 99% of the time), can't work on other stuff, that is possibly more productive. And let' not forget that suffering as a cost for society, usually building even more suffering. For instance, the assigned helper mother will get her dreams shattered, which will result in her being depressed, probably caring less for her healthy kids. They will be more likely have worse grades, nasty teenage behaviour, etc. The mother will probably need antidepressants, which causes other problems, and so on.
It's obviously a bit caricatural, but from a collectivist perspective, you see that such issues take a toll on a community, no matter at what scale. Freedom of choice is really effective when you take into account what impact your choices will have on others, may it be nature, society, your community. The individual and community are always connected, the ethics of your indivudal choices are then always related to their impact on the community.
Chosing to suffer to make things worse for everyone, doesn't make you a hero, but these mothers still deserve respect.

I think that eugenics are on women's side.

83489

>>83485
There are a lot of traditional cultures that eat chimp. In the end they're just another animal. I don't think we should treat them any different than pigs or cows.

Anonymous 83492

I don't get how you could object to it if you're already cool with abortion in general.

Aborting because the fetus will have a disability is no worse than aborting because you don't want to be poor and or don't think you'd be a good parent.

Anonymous 83493

We're focusing too much on the kid and not enough on the would be mother if she doesn't want to be chained to a child that would never be capable of taking care of themselves or her eventually then that's her choice
Is it ableist I'd argue not since no 'person' is being discriminated against lol just some fetus

Anonymous 83496

>>83269
Let them live, they are their own people, disabilities or not

Anonymous 83498

>>83496
>drooling borderline vegetable on life support is "their own person"
I'm gonna say nah

Anonymous 83499

>>83269

It is ableist, all abortion is murder. That being said, would definitely abort a braindead or mentally retarded fetus.

Anonymous 83501

It is but just do it, don't conceive what you don't want to. Simple as.

Anonymous 83503

Yes you are ableist, yes you are discriminating, and there is nothing wrong with that. Just as you are sexist for not sleeping with women, transphobic for not sleeping with trannies, and probably racist if you have a racial preferences.
There is nothing wrong with discrimination.

Anonymous 83505

>>83269
It is not discrimination or insulting to any real disabled person. Thus, "ableism" does not apply. Abortion as a form of eugenics does not hurt anyone.

Anonymous 83523

E0E265AE-5104-4882…

>>83443
> You're baiting right?
Sadly, I’m not. For a while on TikTok I kept getting videos of young women explaining why you shouldn’t abort disabled fetuses because that would be ableist and eugenics. I wish I had saved a few. It’s from the same crowd who have a weird thing against mothers of autistic children. There are quite a few people who identify as feminists who hold this position.



[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]