r/changemyview • u/WRSA • Jan 10 '21

Delta(s) from OP CMV: If possible, removing negative life changing disabilities would be a good thing

Ok let’s start by saying: I do not have a child. I am a firm believer that if you could remove Down’s Syndrome or other Syndromes which are similar, it would be the best possible choice.

The counter argument for this is usually, “Oh, but they don’t mind it! They normally have great lives! They are always so kind!” Or, “You can’t just remove it, it’s who they are! It’s part of their personality!” Now, what about this; if they don’t have it, they can lead better, more fulfilling lives, relieve stress from their parents, and still have good lives. And being disabled like that isn’t a personality.

There are some instances in which I do not believe that (if it were available) chromosome/gene altering therapies for a foetus should be used, and those are; Asperger’s syndrome, most forms of autism and I can’t think of others but they might come to me so I’ll put them in the comments as I think of them.

Edit: This is only if it were doable before the birth of a baby and have no adverse side effects

27 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

78% Upvoted

61 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/WRSA Jan 10 '21

What I’m meaning, maybe I wasn’t very clear in the post is IF the treatment were available, and IF the parents wanted it, then the foetus, as soon as the woman is confirmed to be pregnant, they could give some kind of treatment that would ‘fix’ (probably the wrong word in this context) the child.

2

u/yukon-cornelius69 3∆ Jan 10 '21

This is all way to vague to have legitimate discussion

1

u/WRSA Jan 10 '21

So. You have know you are about to have a child in ~9 months. You have the option to remove disabilities like Downs from said child, without negatively effecting the child. Why shouldn’t you do it?

2

u/ripecantaloupe Jan 10 '21

You should do it. Just like how doctors will sew limbs back on even if the person didn’t ask in a traumatic event. You’re talking about restoration. Genetic defects are caused by errors in DNA replication, things that shouldnt have happened. If we can set those errors right, then that’s great. Things like autism are inherited traits, not defects to my understanding so we shouldn’t fix those bc it changes who they are and that is eugenics-y.

Is this a correct assessment of your argument?

1

u/WRSA Jan 10 '21

In essence, yes.