1d ago

Is it wrong to not have a disabled child solely to avoid forcing the child to suffer their whole life?

You're viewing a single thread.

94 comments

You have no moral obligation to have children at all, even if they'll predictably have a happy life. So if their life will instead be predictably horrible (or if they will predictably ruin the lives of the people around them - plenty of severe mental disabilities seem much less horrible for the people themselves than for their caretakers), it's very reasonable to avoid it.
- plenty of severe mental disabilities seem much less horrible for the people themselves than for their caretakers
  in germany we consider this as an original national-socialist thought and expressing such would disqualify you in public discourse.
  
  Source? Or is it just your impression?
  
  Source would probably be the aftertaste of nazism
  
  In the way it is phrased I would second this. The problem is, that it faults the disabled person for the life problem of those around them (THEY are ruining other peoples life). The discourse never ever blames the disabled person here. Doing so will land you in a bad discussive corner - together with the common argumentation of nazis. Though the question of abortion (as stated by OP) is not as clear cut.
- While I'd also support my partner in terminating a pregnancy with a disabled child, please reconsider your wording.
  A disabled person's life isn't necessarily horrible, and neither will they necessarily ruin someone else's life by being born.
  
  I agree that there's a lot of space between "considered disabled" and "horrible life", but OP said "suffer their whole life" which I associated with the latter.
  
  And what is suffering?
  Some people consider Down-Syndrome a horrible condition. Yet, people suffering from it can lead happy and fulfilling lives. It is a slippery slope that, if not navigated carefully, has historically leaded to atrocities.
  
  Yet, people suffering from it can lead happy and fulfilling lives.
  Sure, it's possible for a person with a severe disability to grow up happy. But when one is making a decision in real life (like having a child), one should consider an average case, not a exceptional one. And the average case for an example like Down's Syndrome is pretty bad. It is a bit unclear how to quantify the suffering in this particular disease's case because the main harm to the child is lifelong mental impairment and assorted physical disabilities - but it is at least going to inflict suffering on the child's family, since caring for a child with a severe disability for their entire life isn't exactly fun.
  It is a slippery slope that, if not navigated carefully, has historically leaded to atrocities.
  I don't see the relation. You'll notice that I'm not proposing killing off disabled people for the "improvement of society" or whatever it was that nazis called it. I am not doing this because nonconsensually killing a person is a harm to them. But deciding not to have a child isn't the same thing as murdering a person - it's not harming anyone who exists, and hence may well be morally better than having a child.
  (Oh, I suppose you might mean that I'm arguing that there are circumstances in which it's morally bad for a person to have a child, which is similar to nazi eugenics in that I'm deciding whether or not people should have children? In that case, my answer is that the difference is that I'm a person, not an authoritarian government, and I don't have power (nor, indeed, the desire) to force people to obey my personal moral judgements.)
  
  Do you think happy Down's syndrome people are an exception? I have a different experience.
  
  And the average case for an example like Down’s Syndrome is pretty bad.
  with my experience as care-taker i cannot agree. is there scientific knowledge that you can cite that'd explain me how divergent my experiences are from the averaged realities.
  
  Their wording is fine, you have some internal biases to iron out.
  
  Which in your opinion are?

94 comments