Abstract
Continuing tensions exist between mainstream bioethics and advocates of the disability rights movement. This paper explores some of the grounds for those tensions as exemplified in From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice by Allen Buchanan and coauthors, a book by four prominent bioethicists that is critical of the disability rights movement. One set of factors involves the nature of disability and impairment. A second set involves presumptions regarding social values, including the importance of intelligence in relation to other human characteristics, competition as the basis of social organization, and the nature of the parent–child relationship. The authors’ disapproval of certain aspects of the disability rights movement can be seen to be associated with particular positions regarding these factors. Although the authors intend to use a method of ‘broad reflective equilibrium,’ we argue that their idiosyncratic commitment to particular concepts of disability and particular social values produces a narrowing of the moral significance of their conclusions regarding disability rights.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Asch, A. (2001). Disability, bioethics, and human rights. In G. L. Albrecht, K. D. Seelman, & M. Bury (Eds.), Handbook of disability studies (pp. 297–326). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Wasserman, D., Bickenbach, J., & Wachbroit, R. (Eds.) (2005). Quality of life and human difference. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Parens, E., & Asch, A. (Eds.) (2000). Prenatal testing and disability rights. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
Boyd, K. M. (2001). Disability. Journal of Medical Ethics, 27, 361–362.
Kuczewski, M. G. (2001). Disability: An agenda for bioethics. American Journal of Bioethics, 1, 36–44.
Buchanan, A. E., Brock, D. W., Daniels, N., & Wikler, D. (2000). From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Amundson, R., & Tresky, S. (2007). On a bioethical challenge to disability rights. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 32, 541–561.
Lifton, R. J. (1986). The Nazi doctors: Medical killing and the psychology of genocide. New York: Basic Books.
Gallagher, H. G. (1990). By trust betrayed: Patients, physicians, and the license to kill in the Third Reich. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Lane, H. (1995). Constructions of deafness. Disability and Society, 10, 171–190.
Longmore, P. K., & Umanski, L. (Eds.) (2001). The new disability history: American perspectives. New York: New York University Press.
Woodward, J. R. (1991). Getting rid of ‘special’. Disability Rag and Resource, 12, 35.
Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective happiness. In D. Kahnemann, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 3–25). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Amundson, R. (2000). Against normal function. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 31C, 33–53.
Tremain, S. (2001). On the government of disability. Social Theory and Practice, 27, 617–636.
Tremain, S. (2006). Reproductive freedom, self-regulation, and the government of impairment in utero. Hypatia, 21, 35–53.
Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological Science, 7, 186–189.
Hartog, J., & Oosterbeeck, H. (1998). Health, wealth, and happiness: Why pursue a higher education. Economics of Education Review, 17, 245–256.
Alderson, P. (2001). Down’s syndrome: Cost, quality and value of life. Social Science & Medicine, 53, 627–638.
Rapp, R. (1994). Women’s responses to prenatal diagnosis: A sociocultural perpective on diversity. In K. H. Rothenberg & E. J. Thomson (Eds.), Women and prenatal testing: Facing the challenges of genetic technology (pp. 219–259). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
Wertz, D. C., & Fletcher, J. C. (1993). Feminist criticism of prenatal diagnosis: A response. Clinics in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 36, 541–567.
Nelson, J. L., & Nelson, H. L. (2001). Book review: From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. American Journal of Bioethics, 1, 70–72.
Fletcher, V. (2002). Universal design: Human-centered design for the 21st century. Design, 102, 4–5.
Acknowledgements
This paper has benefited greatly from comments from three anonymous reviewers for the special issue and the special issue editor, Shelley Tremain. RA’s research for this paper was supported by National Institutes of Health grants S06-GM08073 and R03-HG3632-01A1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Amundson, R., Tresky, S. Bioethics and Disability Rights: Conflicting Values and Perspectives. Bioethical Inquiry 5, 111–123 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-008-9096-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-008-9096-3