Scientific advances in the field of medicine have made it possible for health experts to identify genetic factors or parts of the brain that may contribute to different mental health issues including addiction among others. One of the significant aspects of the scientific advances pertains to prenatal diagnosis, which helps in identifying potential congenital disabilities in a fetus to facilitate appropriate action, including treatment of the defect or termination of the pregnancy. With the modern technology, doctors are capable of identifying disabilities in the early weeks of pregnancy. Commonly, doctors recommend abortion for disability cases that cannot be treated to enable a child to lead a healthy life. Abortion is mainly recommended in the early stages of pregnancy since it is much safer and presents less psychological trauma to the parents. However, the forced sterilization or abortion of fetuses found to have disabilities often raises compelling ethical arguments with some parties considering the practice morally correct while others consider it unethical since it involves ending of human life. This research paper will examine the concept of forced sterilization or abortions for fetuses found to have the addiction or other mental health complications from an ethical perspective and provide a justification for the importance of the procedures in ensuring a healthier population.
Prenatal Diagnosis and Testing for Birth Defects
A congenital disability refers to a condition that is present in a child at birth. Some defects are apparent immediately after birth, including a child having extra toes or fingers among others; however, some defects, including lack of hearing or heart defects may require additional tests to determine. In some cases, some congenital disabilities become clear later in a person's life. Some of the factors that contribute to congenital disabilities include genetic factors, where parents pass down disabilities to their children, chromosomal problems, exposure to certain chemicals, infections, or medications during pregnancy, and substance and drug abuse among others. According to Chandrasekharan, Minear, Hung, and Allyse (2014), individuals who are at a higher risk of having a baby with a disability include older persons; people with a personal or family history of birth defects; people who have had a child or children with birth defects in the past; individuals who have used medications that are known to cause birth defects during pregnancy; people with such medical conditions as obesity and diabetes mellitus; and individuals who consume alcohol or take recreational drugs during pregnancy.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
These factors are associated with affected the normal growth and development of a fetus, therefore causing congenital disabilities. For instance, women who drink alcohol or abuse other illegal substances during pregnancy expose their unborn babies to the substances, which further affect their normal growth. As a result, the fetus is likely to develop lifetime disabilities, including learning, behavioral, intellectual, and physical disabilities. For example, consuming marijuana during pregnancy is closely associated with giving birth to children with behavioral and attention problems. The different factors that increase the risk of having children with congenital disabilities have necessitated prenatal diagnosis and testing to minimize events of children born with disabilities ( Chandrasekharan, Minear, Hung & Allyse, 2014) . Prenatal diagnosis and testing help to reduce activities of congenital disabilities by identifying affected fetuses and informing treatment and management approaches that help in addressing the disabilities to allow for normal births. Some of the most common strategies used in managing cases of fetuses found to have mental health complications and addiction issues are sterilization or abortion of the fetuses. However, these interventions have received much criticism since some parties consider them unethical despite other parties arguing that they are essential in bringing forth a healthy population.
Arguments for and against Selective Abortion and Sterilization of Fetuses with Birth Defects
One of the significant questions that emerge from prenatal diagnosis that leads to selective abortion or sterilization of fetuses with defects is whether the procedure is ethical or morally correct. The process also leads to the question of whether a fetus is counted as a person as well as the ethical problems and roles that face both the doctors and the families involved. Parties that are pro-life argue that prenatal diagnosis is unethical since it gives potential parents an option of aborting or sterilizing an abnormal fetus to minimize episodes of having children with congenital disabilities. According to Petersen (2015), prenatal diagnosis helps in revealing whether a fetus has physical or chromosomal abnormalities and provides the parents with an opportunity to decide whether they will keep the baby or not. Pro-life individuals, however, maintain that selective abortion or sterilization is pure evil without actually mentioning the benefits that the procedures present to the baby, the parents, as well as the larger society.
Conversely, pro-choice individuals who support the autonomy of women argue that prenatal diagnosis is essential since it grants the prospective parents the right to have healthy children. Pro-choice parties maintain that the fundamental goal of such procedures as a prenatal diagnosis is to hinder the birth of children who are disabled, therefore making selective abortion a crucial part of the entire procedure. Moreover, the parties argue that abortion is strongly encouraged in nearly all parties of the world in today. However, parents need to be actively engaged in deciding whether to sterilize or abort the fetus since the decision is not straightforward ( Pfeffer Billauer, 2016) . In some cases, parents opt to keep the baby even if its life will only bring suffering since they consider the fetus a human being that requires their protection. Performing prenatal diagnosis in the early stages of pregnancy enables the doctors to determine if there are defects in the fetus for purposes of such interventions as terminating the pregnancy. However, in the later stages of pregnancy, diagnosis is often conducted to enhance the wellbeing of the fetus, and it may involve such procedures as sterilization as well as the best time for delivery to minimize the risk of defects that may occur at birth.
Benefits of Prenatal Diagnosis and Selective Abortion
Prenatal diagnosis provides numerous benefits to the fetus, parents, as well as the society. The first benefit of the procedure is that it helps in revealing diseases that affect fetuses, and which can be effectively treated while the fetus is in the mother’s womb to prevent disabilities. Such diseases include Vitamin B12 responsive methylmalonic academia, galactosemia, Rhesus hemophilic disease, and Biotin-dependent multiple carboxylase deficiencies among others ( Pfeffer Billauer, 2016) . On the other hand, mothers benefit from the procedure; for instance, fetuses that show signs of fetal hydrocephalus may expose the mother to severe and prolonged labor. Therefore, the procedure allows doctors to plan for early delivery or cesarean delivery to prevent the mother from experiencing the much pain that is associated with such conditions. Other examples of conditions that may affect the mother if not addressed early include urinary tract obstruction and gastroschisis, which all require early labor or delivery.
Further, sterilization and abortion of fetuses found to have disabilities is helpful to the society since it shields the society from incurring the substantial expenses that are associated with taking care of people with congenital or genetic disabilities, including medical expenses among others. Eventually, such children die prematurely, which makes it ethical to prevent the birth of such children since there is little help that they can be granted to help them live quality lives with no suffering. Moreover, children born suffering from mental disorders live a life of suffering since most of these conditions are incurable. Therefore, abortion of the fetus is considered ethical since it relieves the child the difficulties of living an entire life of facing the challenges that come with mental disorders ( Vizcarrondo, 2014) . On the other hand, the sterilization of such fetuses may be considered ethical since it prevents the advancement of the mental disorders to the coming generations, therefore helping to realize a near disability-free society.
Conclusion
Abortion or sterilization of fetuses found with congenital disabilities is crucial in preventing parents as well as the children to suffer pain and other unpleasant events that come with disabilities in future. However, conducting the procedures requires the involvement of both parents and the medical professionals, particularly in deciding on the best option to take concerning the fetus. Hence, although conducting the procedures may be regarded as morally correct or ethical since it protects the parents and the child from suffering, forcing parents to pursue such proceedings would be unethical. Parents should be educated on the conditions affecting their fetuses and the potential effects of the conditions on the quality of life of both the child and parents and left to decide on their best option.
References
Chandrasekharan, S., Minear, M. A., Hung, A., & Allyse, M. A. (2014). Noninvasive prenatal testing goes global. Science translational medicine , 6 (231), 231fs15.
Petersen, C. J. (2015). Reproductive justice, public policy, and abortion on the basis of fetal impairment: Lessons from international human rights law and the potential impact of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. JL & Health , 28 , 121.
Pfeffer Billauer, B. (2016). Abortion, moral law, and the First Amendment: the conflict between fetal rights & freedom of religion. Wm. & Mary J. Women & L. , 23 , 271.
Vizcarrondo, F. E. (2014). Human enhancement: The new eugenics. The Linacre Quarterly , 81 (3), 239-243.
