SEPTEMBER'S Spare Rib printed an extract from Pride Against Prejudice: transforming attitudes to disability' by Jenny Morris.
Morris argues that there should be constraints upon the richt to choose. which rela 'on the liberal humanist tradinon within europe and stri ca. In particular, she argues for grounds:
constraints on women's choice because of their assessment of the situation facing them if they have to care for a disabled baby.
• 'the individualist traditoon the in repual. As a reic tion.
The individual. As a result social and collective responsibility are denied!
• the rights of the fetus are denied and these begin with viability, which Morris puts at 24 wecks. After that point, she says, 'women have no absolute right to choose whether to have a disabled child or not!
Underlying her arguments is the contention that allowing abortion of fetuses solely on the grounds that they have disabilprejudice against the disabled.
Much of what Morris says, and the language she uses sounds exactly the anti-abortionists. But, disre garding this, her arguments. leserve to be considered.
First though, the problem needs to be put in perspective. Morris argues that abortions should not be allowed beyond 24 weeks. She omits to mention the second case for which it is still allowed - risk to the life or health of the woman.
Even if all abortions after 24 weeks were banned, it would have little effect on abortions done on the grounds of fetal ab normality. In 1989, the last year for which full figures are available, 4 out of the 23 post-24 week abortions were done on the grounds of fetal abnormality In 1990 there were 1,619 abordons on the grounds of fordt do normality - slightly down from 1,679 in 1989.
Fancy includes abortions done on a mixture of ing into account the effect on existing children.
The mother might already ability whose care would be affected by the birth of another child.
Previous pregnancy It could be her own health -perhaps i persended by the roo pregnancy Women having abortions on likely than average to have had live or stillborn children. the possibility that abnormality may exist. For example, the woman may contract rubella, or come into contact with some one else at the relevant time in her pregnancy (well before 24 weeks) or even get immunised before she realises that she is already pregnant.
She might then be advised to have an abortion as a precaution against having a baby that may have multiple disabilities, such as blindness, deafness and Other women know that they are carriers for disabilities which only affect their male children. Early tests to determine sex may result in aborting all male fetuses, but in fact only half will (on average) carry the discase, such as haemophilia. in (nearest tube Holorn) Australian anti-abortionists put former Labour PM Hawke in the hot seat this particular case, a further test can determine which 50 percent, but for other genetic discent or of then bom The number of babies with disabilities seems to be dropping. In 1979, the rate per 10,000 births of babies born with such disabilities as ance phalus (no brain), spina bifida, Down's syndrome, cardiovascular malformations, and cleft palate was 210.4. By 1989, the rate was 180.3.
Nervous system
This reduction is not necessarly due fust to abortion. ADOr tions on grounds of central nervous system matormations (CNS) (ancephalus, spina bifida, hydrocephalus) have been dropping since accurate records have been taken. The rate of Down's syndrome, on the other hand, has fluctuated.
In 1989, there were a total of 1,735 abortions on grounds of "known or suspected fetal ab normality affecting management of mother. Out of 12,462 babies born with disabilities in 1989, 200 were stillborn.
A number of conclusions could be drawn from these figures. Either screening for abnormalities is partial or inefficient, or a significant number of parents opt not to be screened, or do not take action on the re sults.
The fact that abortion is not responsible for all the decrease in CNS births is underlined by orted in the Republic of Ire and, where there are no screen.
Another area worthy of discussion is one often raised by anti-abortionists. They fre quently claim that all the ills of society are due to (legalised) abortion, and one of these is the appalling way in which people with disabilities (whom they persist in calling 'handicapped') are treated.
There is no doubt that individuals do not and society docs not treat people with disabilities as they deserve. But has the situation worsened since 1967, and if it has is it because of abortion?
Theanswerto these questions schoolchild in the 40s and 50s, children with disabilities did not go to mainstream schools at all and now very many do so. in fact, such children were seldom seen because they were kept be hind closed curtains in their own homes.
Inadequate funding adequate) recognition of and funding for carers. We have a growth in self organisation of people with disabilities. ability is beginning to be discussed openly instead of being hidden. i Of course, things are a million miles away from perfect and in many respects (particularly in ployment and some aspects of medical care) things have re cently got worse, but this is not due to abortion being legal, it is due to a government which is cutting everything worthwhile it can lay its hands on. have had legal abortion for , much longer than we have Jenny Morris talks, quite rightly, about the constraints women contemplating the birth of a baby with disabilities. But to a lesser degree many women have abortions of 'normal' fe tuses on similar grounds - because they feel society cannot provide them and their baby with what they need.
Banned
On her arguments, so-called banned, as indeed anti-abortionists argue, at any point in I have not dealt with the concept of viability in this article, partly for reasons of space, and artly because we argued aboul his one endlessly during th campaigns against Alton and the proposed amendments last year.
This discussion needs to be had out in the pro-choice move ment, if only to arm ourselves better for arguments with the anti-abortionists.
But it also deserves attention as a method for fostering links between the women's liberation movement and the movement for the liberation of people with disabilities.
Join the National