abortionDisability and abortion
This is an issue which many supporters of abortion find themselves in a quandary about. They argue that whilst a person with a disability should be treated exactly the same as someone without a disability; the issue remains that in many ways they are not.
People with a disability are still at a disadvantage in our society. The more severe that disability the less likely that person can live a normal life.
But it is possible to think this whilst arguing for an end to discrimination against disabled people.
Opposition to abortion on grounds of a disability is discussed further in our anti-abortion section.

If you are disabled or know someone who is, or if you have been faced with a diagnosis of disability during pregnancy, do you think that babies with disabilities should have the same rights and protection as babies without disabilities? Should the abortion law be changed?
The Golden Rule
Is there an alternative to fretting over women’s rights, and whether fetuses are people? The utilitarian philosopher Richard Hare believed so. He argued from the Golden Rule; “Treat others as you would wish to be treated in the same situation”.
Since most mothers would not have wanted to be aborted when they were fetuses, abortion is, on the face of it, wrong; even for a fetus with spina bifida who is likely to be handicapped, because if we were that fetus we would choose life in a wheelchair rather than no life at all.
But imagine that the mother plans a family of just one child. If she carries this pregnancy she will bear a child with spina bifida. If she aborts she can have a normal child who would not otherwise exist. That “replacement” child would wish the abortion to happen. The mother cannot act as both the spina bifida and the replacement child would wish.
Hare asks what you would choose if you had to live through the lives of both