The Disability Rights Critique of Technologies that Eliminate Human Genetic Variation
The development and use of an expanding range of medical technologies that yield genetic information about embryos and fetuses has raised ethical questions about whether and how this increasingly routine set of practices discriminates against people with disabilities. A conversation in the form of academic articles and public media offers explications and critiques about the social and moral harms human gene editing and prenatal genetic testing and the selective reproduction practices it prompts bring to humanity. These purported harms range from increased social inequity—at the very least—to structural and individual violence—at the very most.
This collection suggests that conversations about these technologies have changed over time and also reflects the varied communities engaged in those conversations over time and across social locations. The collection thus focuses on the health humanities in the broadest sense. This means that the data, evidence, and knowledge it gathers come from the lives of individuals, families, and human communities who live with disabilities and illnesses, not from medical-scientific or clinical data. The stories in the final section of…
- Garland-Thomson, R. (2016, August 19). Becoming disabled. The New York Times.
- Parens, E., & Asch, A. (2003). Disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing: Reflections and recommendations. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 9(1), 40–47.
- National Council on Disability. (2019). Genetic testing and the rush to perfection: Part of the bioethics and disability series.
- Garland-Thomson, R. (2017). Disability bioethics: From theory to practice. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 27(2), 323–339.
- Lid, I. M. (2022). The significance of relations. Rethinking autonomy in a disability perspective. In K. J. Fjetland, A. Gjermestad, & I. M. Lid (Eds.), Lived citizenship for persons in vulnerable life situations: Theories and practices (pp. 99–113). Scandinavian University Press.
- Hurlbut, J. B., Saha, K., & Jasanoff, S. (2015). CRISPR democracy: Gene editing and the need for inclusive deliberation. Issues in Science and Technology, 32(1).
- Guidry-Grimes, L., Stahl, D., & Reynolds, J. M. (2023). Louisiana’s “medically futile” unborn child list: Ethical lessons at the post-Dobbs intersection of reproductive and disability justice. Hastings Center Report, 53(1), 3–6.
- Scully, J. L., & Burke, T. B. (2019, July 9). Russia’s CRISPR “deaf babies”: The next genome editing frontier? Impact Ethics.
- Farrell, R. M., & Allyse, M. A. (2018). Key ethical issues in prenatal genetics. Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America, 45(1), 127–141.
- Boardman, F. K., & Clark, C. C. (2022). What is a ‘serious’ genetic condition? The perceptions of people living with genetic conditions. European Journal of Human Genetics, 30, 160–169.
- Richardson, A., & Ormond, K. E. (2018). Ethical considerations in prenatal testing: Genomic testing and medical uncertainty. Seminars in Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 23(1), 1–6.
- Werner-Lin, A., Mccoyd, J. L. M., & Bernhardt, B. A. (2019). Actions and uncertainty: How prenatally diagnosed variants of uncertain significance become actionable. Hastings Center Report, 49(S1), S61–S71.
- Sandel, M. J. (2004, April 1). The case against perfection. The Atlantic.
- Callahan, S. (2013). Abortion and the sexual agenda. In P. B. Jung & L. S. Jung (Eds.), Moral Issues and Christian Responses (8th ed.). 1517 Media.
- Dive, L., Holmes, I., & Newson, A. (in press). Is it just for a screening program to give people all the information they want? American Journal of Bioethics.
- De Melo-Martín, I. (2022). Reproductive embryo editing: Attending to justice. Hastings Center Report, 52(4), 26–33.
- Meredith, S., Brackett, S., Diaz, K. M., Freeman, K. G., Huggins, E., Khan, H., Leach, M. W., Levitz, M., Michie, M., Onufer, J., Skotko, B. G., Smith, L., White, A. N., Waller, T., Ayers, K., & Prenatal Subcommittee of the Center for Dignity in Healthcare for People with Disabilities. (2023). Recommendations to improve the patient experience and avoid bias when prenatal screening/testing. Disability and Health Journal, 16(2), Article 101401.
- Solomon, A. (2019, September 2). The dignity of disabled lives. The New York Times.
- Harmon, A. (2004). Burden of knowledge: Tracking prenatal health; In new tests for fetal defects, agonizing choices for parents. The New York Times.
- Gann, J. (2017, November 26). Every parent wants to protect their child. I never got the chance. To fight for my son, I have to argue that he should never have been born. The Cut.
- Rapp, E. (2011, October 15). Notes from a dragon mom. The New York Times.
- Weiss, E. J. (2020). Billy Idol. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 63(1), 66–72.
- Reynolds, J. M. (2018, March 5). May the odds be ever in your favour? The politics of prognosis. Aeon.
- Zhang, S. (2020, December). The last children of Down syndrome. The Atlantic.
- TODAY Contributor. (2019, January 2). The first Gerber baby with Down syndrome is stealing hearts. TODAY.
- Waldman, K. (2020, September 3). When the world isn’t designed for our bodies. The New Yorker.
- Hirsch, E. (2023, March 28). I am going blind, and I now find it strangely exhilarating. The New York Times.
- Iezzoni, L. I. (2022, January 13). Many doctors are still befuddled by accommodating people with disability. STAT.
About ELSIhub Collections
ELSIhub Collections are essential reading lists on fundamental or emerging topics in ELSI, curated and explained by expert Collection Editors, often paired with ELSI trainees. This series assembles materials from cross-disciplinary literatures to enable quick access to key information.