Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The morality of screening for disability.

Jeff McMahan1

  • 1Department of Philosophy, Rutgers University, 26 Nichol Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-2882, USA. JMcMahan@Princeton.edu

Reproductive Biomedicine Online
|April 12, 2005
PubMed
Summary

Arguments against disability screening suggest it

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Moral responsibility for the scarcity of healthcare in Gaza.

Journal of medical ethics·2025
Same author

Bioethics' Duty to Conference in Qatar: Reply to Magnus.

The American journal of bioethics : AJOB·2024
Same author

Reasons and Reproduction: Gene Editing and Genetic Selection.

The American journal of bioethics : AJOB·2023
Same author

Genetic modification of characteristic masculine traits: enhancement or deformity?

Journal of medical ethics·2013
Same author

Infanticide and moral consistency.

Journal of medical ethics·2013
Same author

Is prenatal genetic screening unjustly discriminatory?

The virtual mentor : VM·2012

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Disability Studies
  • Reproductive Technologies

Background:

  • Concerns exist regarding preimplantation and prenatal screening for disabilities.
  • Objections cite discrimination, negative impacts on disabled individuals, and reduced human diversity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze the logical implications of objections to disability screening.
  • To examine the ethical consistency of opposing screening while affirming the value of disabled lives.

Main Methods:

  • Philosophical argumentation
  • Ethical analysis
  • Examination of moral consistency

Main Results:

  • If objections to screening are valid, they imply permissibility of causing disability.
  • Individuals opposing screening must logically permit intentionally causing disabling conditions, even for trivial reasons.

Conclusions:

  • The ethical objections to disability screening are undermined if they lead to accepting the deliberate causation of disability.
  • Reconsidering the implications of anti-screening arguments is necessary for ethical consistency.

Related Experiment Videos