Response to Implication of Prenatal Diagnosis for Human Right to Life

In his publication, Leon R. Kass debates on the ethical difficulties associated with the abortion of

fetus a identified by amniocentesis to be defective genetically. In his discussion he is seen to set

aside the moral concept surrounding abortion in its broadness. The author holds his opinion that

the abortion of genetically defective fetus is a symbolic threat to the concept of “radical moral

equality of all human beings”. This is despite the fact that the practice involves a complete

qualitative examination of the fetus to identify these genetic mutations before deciding to keep or

abort the examined fetus. Kass rather argues that the practice of abortion to the genetically

mutated fetus will only serve to amplify the already existing negative perception of those who

are already genetically disabled and as a result would be led to treat them as second-class

citizens. He further argues that should the practice be adapted; it would imply the agreement of a

rather absurd concept that “Defectives should not be born”.

In my own personal opinion, I do agree with the author that the adaption of the practice of

abortion of the genetically disabled fetus is a huge threat to the human life and more so a

negligence on the concept of “all humans are equal’. The author has clearly illustrated the fact

that genetic disability is not a factor that only started existing recently but that it’s an element

that’s been in existence for a very long time. Attempting to eradicate such kind of genetic

disability will require one to go against the core foundation of humanity and as such will require

one loose their humanity first. I therefore do advocate that rather than attempting to destroy

genetically mutated being in the pretense that it would help stop the prevalence of the same, I

propose that we should embrace these beings and accept them as the human that they are.
 Response to Genetics and Reproductive Risk: Can Having Children be Immoral?

The author Laura M. Purday in her publication talks about genetic mutation and how it has

affected the human’s ability to reproduce and have children. She starts off by questioning the

concept of reproduction and the reason for reproduction. She argues that humans reproduce for

various reasons some of which are justified while others in her opinion are nonsensical. She also

goes ahead and discusses about the concept of abortion in partiality by presenting her opinion

that truly abortion is a necessary evil. She argues that there are many factors involved when it

comes to abortion and that looking at it bluntly from the outside will only result in misjudgment.

The author justifies her argument by bringing forth the Huntington’s genetic disease as a case

study. She argues that the disease is easily passed on from the parent to the child and a result the

parent should rather choose not to procreate or rather carefully procreate to ensure that the child

does not get to inherit the parent’s fate. The author also justifies that in such a scenario abortion

becomes a necessary evil as it presents an opportunity for the parent to critically examine the

fetus before deciding to keep it on the grounds that it is not genetically deformed. She therefore

argues that it is morally wrongful to reproduce should the parent know that there exists a high

risk of transmitting a serious defect.

In my opinion, I do agree with the author that parents should be more careful in choosing

partners in order to avoid genetic defects, however, I do not agree with the author that it is

immoral to reproduce when there exists a potential risk to be passed on to the child. Rather I

support that people should be given the opportunity to reproduce irrespective of the potential

defects that might be passed on to the children. The author only looks at this from a negative

point of view which is the disease but fails to look at it from another perspective. To begin a

child’s defect is only part of that child, but there are a lot more other aspect to that child than just
the disease at hand such as the child’s abilities, skills and talents. Deciding to end a life based on

only one factor and ignoring all the other factors does not sit right with me. Additionally, should

this argument be adapted then parents would choose to end a fetus’s life based on very minute

defect and deny the fetus an opportunity to live and explore its abilities.