By George Neumayr on 5.5.05 @ 12:08AM
Today's only acceptable standard.
The slogan, Every Child a Wanted Child, always gave off a
eugenic chill, implying that unwanted children weren't fit for
life. But it didn't quite spell out what makes a child unwanted.
Were the meaning of the slogan unpackaged and given more eugenic
precision, it would read: Every Child a Perfect Child.
Imperfect children aren't wanted children -- this is the logical
terminus of a society obsessed with choice and control, and the
culture is hurtling towards it. If you doubt this, note the growing
impatience with imperfection in children, both unborn and born,
that increasingly dominates the culture of reproductive choice and
control. The New York Times ran a story earlier this week
titled, "Ugly Children May Get Parental Short Shrift." The article
doesn't even mention the shortest shrift they receive: eugenic
abortion. To the extent that the numbers are known, most unborn
children deemed ugly by virtue of a disability detected through
prenatal screening are aborted, and research surveys have shown
that many parents will choose abortion once doctors become able to
diagnose nothing more than "obesity" prenatally.
The every-child-a-wanted-child sloganeers ludicrously promised a
culture of greater sensitivity to children. What it actually
produced was a culture of habitual cruelty toward children,
mainstreaming abuse against them, starting in the womb, and
implicitly conferred upon parents a right to abuse or neglect
children who didn't live up to expectations or proved inconvenient
in some way. That child abuse rates climbed after the legalization
of abortion is no accident. According to pro-life writer Karen
Gordon, after "New York legalized abortion in 1968, it experienced
a rise in child abuse of 44% per year. Washington state legalized
abortion in 1970. Within 28 months, incidents of child abuse in
Seattle, its largest city, rose 379%."
If unwanted children could be abused before birth, why not
afterwards too? One child abuse expert, Philip Ney, had the guts to
say that in the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry in 1979:
"When we are so careful not to tamper with the delicate balances of
plant and animal ecology, one wonders why we do not at least study
the far-reaching effects that killing unborn infants may be having
on the human species. We may have disrupted a very delicate
balance....The abortion of unborn infants may diminish the value of
all children. When the destruction of the unborn is socially
sanctioned and even applauded, children cannot have much
value."
The every-child-a-wanted-child concept elevated the rejection of
imperfect children to an enlightened choice, and pumped life into a
discredited eugenics movement. That eugenics drive has brought
American society to the threshold of the total eugenics of designer
children. Germline genetic engineering, which allows scientists to
manipulate the genes of an embryo, has begun, and preimplantation
genetic diagnosis (PGD), which gives scientists the power to select
the most desirable embryos for in vitro fertilization, is becoming
more common.
"These are grown-up people expressing their reproductive
choices. We cherish that in the United States," Jeffrey Steinberg,
a director of fertility clinics that use PGD, has said. "These
people are really happy when they get what they want."
PGD is so dubious most decadent European countries won't even
touch it. But in America, where Roe v. Wade has given
fertility merchants total immunity, PGD is used for "family
balancing," as the Washington Post put it in a story last
year. This means parents are using PGD for the most basic form of
design: to screen out either male or female embryos. "If you ask
couples coming in what they will do if they get the wrong sex,
these couples say very frankly they will terminate the pregnancy,"
Mark Sauer, director of the division of reproductive endocrinology
at Columbia University, told the Post.
For all of this culture's talk about "unconditional love" of
children, its tolerance of them is baldly conditional: It permits
them to live on the condition that they possess wanted traits. It
is not a culture of love but a culture of control, and woe to the
children who don't meet its solipsistic expectations.
topics:
Abortion