It is a penalty for a crime already committed, one that is appropriate to the crime and focuses limited resources on the kid that is already here.
Just curious, will there be some sort of commission that determines which traits are "undesirable"?
It is obvious to a physician when a child has fetal alcohol syndrome. I am certain that a second or third opinion would not be difficult; they have plenty of time for observation in the NICU at $50,000 per day and goodness knows how much over that child's lifetime. It is obvious when two people with cystic fibrosis have a child and had been counseled against doing it in their medical chart. It is obvious when a crack baby shows drugs in their blood. At that point, charges should be filed. Should they be found guilty, such is the penalty. It beats putting them in jail for a crime that, considering its magnitude, should otherwise have them incarcerated for a very long time. Would you prefer that?
Stick your projected NAZI fantasies where they belong. Your covetousness of other people's money with which to fund your breast-beating is more than evident.
*****************************
You and others may believe that two people with CF might be advised to consider the implications of having a child given the chance of that child having CF, but that is a far cry from making it a crime and sterilizing them. How is not being born better? There is always the posibility of a cure.
Man is not God.
Prognosis[edit]
The prognosis for cystic fibrosis has improved due to earlier diagnosis through screening, better treatment and access to health care. In 1959, the median age of survival of children with cystic fibrosis in the United States was six months.[93] In 2010, survival is estimated to be 37 years for women and 40 for men.[4] In Canada, median survival increased from 24 years in 1982 to 47.7 in 2007.[94]
Of those with cystic fibrosis who are more than 18 years old as of 2009, 92% had graduated from high school, 67% had at least some college education, 15% were disabled and 9% were unemployed, 56% were single and 39% were married or living with a partner.[95] In Russia the overall median age of patients is 25, which is caused by the absence or high cost of medication and the fact that lung transplantation is not performed.[96]
Source: Wikipedia
We can all die at any time. Vast improvements have been made in the treatment and quality of life of those with CF. Those improvements might never have been made if we had simply given up and sterilized those who carry the gene.
There you go with the whole "limited resources" mantra that's invariably brought out by eugenicists.
It is obvious to a physician when a child has fetal alcohol syndrome. I am certain that a second or third opinion would not be difficult; they have plenty of time for observation in the NICU at $50,000 per day and goodness knows how much over that child's lifetime.
So, you consider it impossible that a woman can turn her life around and give birth to a healthy baby later?
It is obvious when two people with cystic fibrosis have a child and had been counseled against doing it in their medical chart. It is obvious when a crack baby shows drugs in their blood. At that point, charges should be filed. Should they be found guilty, such is the penalty.
So, you consider having cystic fibrosis or any other condition that medicine counsels against to be a "crime"?
Stick your projected NAZI fantasies where they belong.
The only fantasies here are the ones that YOU have about bringing back eugenics.
Your covetousness of other people's money with which to fund your breast-beating is more than evident.
So, opposing involuntary sterilization in people with certain genetic conditions is "coveting other people's money"?
“Stick your projected NAZI fantasies where they belong. Your covetousness of other people’s money with which to fund your breast-beating is more than evident.”
Perhaps the Yiddish shtick of “With your gelt and my guilt, we can do great things.” is more descriptive?