When Abortion Becomes Eugenics
CW: eugenics and white supremacy (referred to as “WS” for the rest of this post)
Please read this whole post before commenting as it is multifaceted and highly nuanced.
Awhile back we had a discussion on my Facebook page about eugenics and abortion. I had made the statement that choosing to terminate an otherwise wanted pregnancy solely because the otherwise viable fetus would have a disability is eugenics. This is true.
(And to be Very Clear, this does NOT include terminating pregnancies in which the fetus will not survive or will be in incredible pain.)
In response, I was accused of being a forced birther, which is patently untrue. In actuality, these two seemingly oppositional ideals are actually both true AND ALSO not in conflict with each other, but are actually in conflict with the larger force of WS.
Before I go on, I need to address some details.
As a metaphor, cut gems have different facets, right? But they're all facets. They all exist and are undeniable. But they are different angles and reflect different things. That's what this conversation is. One facet of the bigger conversation about both Disability Rights and also bodily autonomy. They may very well contradict each other at times, but that doesn't mean they aren't both true. The gem in this case is WS. And the solution to all facets of these issues is to end WS.
(Much like a cut diamond, some people may at first find beauty in it, but then we look closer at the social realities of diamonds and we learn that they are covered in blood and they were a scam to begin with and they lack the value they claim to have.) (This metaphor is writing itself, I swear!)
Secondly…
If you think you cannot handle a disabled child, *you should not have a child.* This sounds mean, but I don't mean it that way. I mean it frankly. Because the truth is that any child (or adult!) can become disabled at any time. And/or you may have a totally healthy baby who will turn out to be disabled (ie autism or ADHD or even EDS, etc).
Therefore…
*Because* disability can happen at any time, you cannot responsibly consider becoming a parent if you feel you cannot be a parent to a disabled child.
We are not guaranteed children and there are many other ways to help raise or love children in your life.
It is also important to understand that these two questions are rooted in very different kinds of thinking.
For abortion access, we are discussing tangible things: every person who needs an abortion should have access to safe abortions. Full stop. This is a discussion about bodily autonomy. This affects very real people.
When discussing eugenics, however, it is inherently a more nebulous discussion. We are talking about theoretical people here.
I’ve educated and written extensively here about how a fetus or an embryo is not the same thing as a baby and how abortion does not harm them. I am in no way advocating for the rights of fetuses. Period.
But this nebulous theory also affects very real people because the constructs we believe create very real barriers for people in society. This question of whether or not to terminate an otherwise wanted pregnancy with an otherwise viable fetus is inherently asking the question: do Disabled folx deserve to exist?
For example:
In some countries, there are almost zero people being born with Down syndrome. Most people with Down syndrome can live fully, healthy lives, so why are we choosing not to allow them to exist anymore? Because that’s what it boils down to, isn’t it? Someday, they will no longer exist in those countries. What does that feel like to those who have Down syndrome and live in these countries? And, more importantly, where is the line? At what point is a disability “too much” to allow it to exist? Remember, there are still people out there wanting to cure autism - how does one cure a neurotype? You cannot rewire a brain, you can only stop it from being born.
Once we start eliminating populations, we are in a bad place: eugenics. Disabled people have a right to exist, full stop.
Let me take a moment to clarify something important.
Now you may be protesting something like: “But I got pregnant accidentally and do not have the resources to raise a disabled child in this society!”
Let me be very clear here: I am not judging any singular person for surviving in this toxic world. Sometimes people say “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” and I would broaden that to say that we all will be forced to do things which are unethical because the world we live in is run by capitalism, patriarchy, and WS.
So I am attempting to speak about these hard topics because we MUST bring them into the light to be seen; we cannot fight what is shrouded in darkness. Until we start naming WS when we see it, we will never crush it. But I am NOT judging you for any singular thing you’ve had to do to survive this world.
Furthermore, I know that I stated above that a person should not consider becoming a parent unless they feel they can raise a disabled child. This is true. But I am still not judging you, because I know many of us are learning these things well after we’ve made certain decisions in life, myself included. As we learn better, we do better. But we can still approach our past selves with compassion even as we look forward to a world we understand better.
So then. Back to the discussion itself.
All people should have access to abortions without restrictions.
*and*
Terminating an otherwise wanted pregnancy solely because the viable fetus has a disability is eugenics.
So while it may sound at first like these are two concepts that are utterly incompatible, when we step back and look at the whole picture, you can see that both ideas are actually opposing WS.
WS is what is making abortions illegal. They want more white babies. If there are more Brown and Black ones, that's fine for WS because it will use classism to keep them oppressed, serving the new generation of white babies.
WS also is behind eugenics, obviously. They want you to terminate any pregnancy that is not perfect because they cannot be the "supreme race" if there is disability.
All people should have access to abortions without restrictions.
*and*
Terminating an otherwise wanted pregnancy solely because the viable fetus has a disability is eugenics.
These two statements are not enemies. They can both be true AND can contradict each other. The nature of our world is complex and sometimes two true things contradict each other.
These two statements are both fighting the enemy, WS. But WS benefits from our infighting. So long as we see each other as the opposite, we spend our energy in the wrong place. If we recognize our common enemy, WS, we can stand together and really have a chance to oppose it.
We must become comfortable with being uncomfortable. If any of this feels personal to you, lean into that discomfort and examine it. There is no growth in comfort and there is no end to WS unless we all grow.
If we don't acknowledge that the termination of an otherwise wanted and viable pregnancy due to disability is eugenics, we are missing a massive chunk of the picture. But that doesn’t mean we infringe on anyone’s right to safe and accessible abortion. Period.
