Masking Eugenics as Science

The boundaries between right and wrong are not the only ones being discussed in the issue of eugenics today. The ideas behind it, which seem to be as taboo as discussing them with a WWII survivor, are still making their way into the practices of prenatal screening among potential parents. Although some claim this advance screening owes its support to science, but is it a mask for eugenics? Can a mother be blamed in wanting the best for her child? It seems that no matter where you turn, you will hear things being discussed as a "genetic disorder", "abnormality" and "defect". We face so many obstacles living in the world today, many made easier by the advancements we have made in science and technology. Would it not also be unfair to force a child with unavoidable disabilities to live with them? Miceli and Steele both discuss the differences in reactions between different socioeconomics groups on the discomfort of disabilities in their child. Their research found that people of a higher socioeconomic classes where more uncomfortable with disabilities associated with down syndrome and retardation, while people in a lower socioeconomic class where more focused on physical venerability. It cases like this, were one would rather choose which type of disability would be less impact full on their child's lives, wouldn't it also be upsetting to not allow them to have the choice of having their child not be born with disabilities when science had allowed so? The ideas of fairness, and value of life will always be sensitive topics, but choosing to have a world where fate is fairness doesn't make much sense either. If everyone should be given the chance to live, shouldn't everyone have the chance of an equal life.