[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Selective Procreation = Euthanasia by increment.

Here’s an antiutopian quagmire: Sooner or later such a designer child will sue their parents regarding his/her civil rights and the Liberals have a moral dilemma:

WAS IT A PERSON before birth and thus have standing?

[neverdem]

Merry Christmas! Thanks, bfl

[The Pack Knight]

Sooner or later such a designer child will sue their parents regarding his/her civil rights and the Liberals have a moral dilemma:

You know, there was a case where a child (through a guardian ad litem) successfully sued a doctor for "wrongful birth".

The doctor had either performed a faulty vasectomy on the father after the parents learned that all of their children would be born deaf, or had informed the parents that their future children would not be deaf. I can't remember which.

Anyway, the appellate judge reasoned that the child had a right to be born whole that had been violated by the doctor's negligent conduct.

In this case, if the same common law reasoning holds in English courts, that same right would have been violated intentionally by the child's parents. Even if this statute does not make it a crime to intentionally have a disabled child, it doesn't necessarily protect the parents from liability towards their children for violating their rights.

After all, the RNID wants to protect the parents' "right to choose", but what of the child's?

[MountainFlower]

shoulda seen it coming! amazing the depravity of man and the direction it takes.