Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of Prenatal Screening on Disability Communities and the Meaning of Disability

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Born Well: Prenatal Genetics and the Future of Having Children

Part of the book series: The International Library of Bioethics ((ILB,volume 88))

Abstract

The advent of prenatal screening technologies has neatly paralleled the evolution of disability rights. During the 1970s and 1980s, the disability movement in many countries campaigned for barrier removal, better provision and recognition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allyse, M., M.A. Minear, E. Berson, S. Sridhar, M. Rote, A. Hung, and S. Chandrasekharan. 2015. Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing: A Review Of International Implementation And Challenges. International Journal of Women’s Health 7: 113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asch, A. & D. Barlevy Disability And Genetics: A Disability Critique Of Pre-Natal Testing And Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis (Pgd). Els. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barter, B., and R. Hastings. 2017. Consultation With Individuals With Down Syndrome About Non Invasive Prenatal Testing (Nipt). London: Mencap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barter, B., R.P. Hastings, R. Williams & J.C. Huws. 2017. Perceptions And Discourses Relating To Genetic Testing: Interviews With People With Down Syndrome. Journal Of Applied Research In Intellectual Disabilities 30 (2: 395–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, F.K. 2014a. The Expressivist Objection To Prenatal Testing: The Experiences Of Families Living With Genetic Disease. Social Science & Medicine 107: 18–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, F.K. 2014b. Experiential Knowledge Of Disability, Impairment And Illness: The Reproductive Decisions Of Families Genetically At Risk. Health 18 (5): 476–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, F.K., P.J. Young & F.E. Griffiths. 2017. Impairment Experiences, Identity And Attitudes Towards Genetic Screening: The Views Of People With Spinal Muscular Atrophy. Journal Of Genetic Counseling. Online Ahead Of Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, L.D., S. Ahmed, M. Ahmed, H. Jafri & Y. Raashid. 2011. ‘All Is Done By Allah'. Understandings Of Down Syndrome And Prenatal Testing In Pakistan. Social Science & Medicine 72 (8): 1393–1399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, L.D., J.M. Green & J. Hewison. 2005. Attitudes Towards Prenatal Diagnosis And Termination In Women Who Have A Sibling With Down's Syndrome. Journal Of Reproductive And Infant Psychology 23 (2): 179–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, L.D., J.M. Green & J. Hewison. 2010. The Role Of Attitudes Towards The Targets Of Behaviour In Predicting And Informing Prenatal Testing Choices Psychology And Health, 25 (10), Pp.1175–1194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, F., and S. Buckley. 2008. Wrongful Deaths And Rightful Lives—Screening For Down Syndrome, Down Syndrome Research And Practice 12 (2): 79–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, M.M., L. Sandman, B. Perez & M. O'leary. 2017. The Phenomenon Of Legislative Advocacy Among Parents Of Children With Disabilities. Journal Of Research In Special Educational Needs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasekharan, S., M.A. Minear, A. Hung & M.A. Allyse. 2014. Noninvasive Prenatal Testing Goes Global. Science Translational Medicine, 6 (231), 231fs15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, H. & M. Van Riper. 2016. Adaptation In Families Of Children With Down Syndrome In East Asian Countries: An Integrative Review. Journal Of Advanced Nursing.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Graaf, G., F. Buckley, J. Dever & B.G. Skotko. 2017. Estimation Of Live Birth And Population Prevalence Of Down Syndrome In Nine Us States. American Journal Of Medical Genetics Part A, 173 (10), Pp.2710–2719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, C., L. Yi, Y. Mu, J. Zhu, Y. Qin, X. Fan, Y. Wang, Q. Li & L. Dai. 2015. Recent trends in the birth prevalence of down syndrome in China: impact of prenatal diagnosis and subsequent terminations. Prenatal Diagnosis 35 (4), Pp.311–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, S.D. 1999. Disability: Definitions. Value And Identity: London, Crc Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enea-Drapeau, C., M. Carlier, and P. Huguet. 2012. Tracking subtle stereotypes of children with trisomy 21: From Facial-feature-based to implicit stereotyping. PLoS ONE 7 (4): E34369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, C. & A.L. Owen. 2016. Siblings Of Disabled Peoples’ Attitudes Toward Prenatal Genetic Testing And Disability: A Mixed Methods Approach. Disability Studies Quarterly 36 (3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland-Thomson, R. the case for conserving disability. Bioethical Inquiry Doi https://doi.org/10.1007/S11673-012-9380-0

  • Gollust, S.E., R.E. Thompson, H. C. Gooding & B.B. Biesecker. 2003. Living with Achondroplasia: Attitudes toward population screening and correlation with quality of life. Prenatal Diagnosis 23 (12): 1003–1008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graaf, G., J. Engelen, A. Gijsbers, R. Hochstenbach, M. Hoffer, A. Kooper, B. Sikkema‐Raddatz, M. Srebniak, A. Kevie‐Kersemaekers & L. Zutven. 2017. estimates of live birth prevalence of children with down syndrome in the period 1991–2015 In The Netherlands. Journal Of Intellectual Disability Research 61 (5): 461–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodapp, R.M. 2007. Families of persons with down syndrome: New perspectives, findings, and research and service needs. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 13 (3): 279–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, B. 2017. ‘You Are Inferior!’Revisiting The Expressivist Argument. Bioethics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, J.M., L. Bennetto & R.D. Rogge. 2015. The relationship between contact and attitudes: Reducing prejudice toward individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Research In Developmental Disabilities, 47: 14–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg, G., L. Slattery, L. Hudgins and K. Ormond. 2014. Attitudes of mothers of children with down syndrome towards noninvasive prenatal testing. Journal Of Genetic Counseling:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, D.A. 2011. Medical disparagement of the disability experience: Empirical evidence for the expressivist objection, Ajob Primary Research 2, 2: Pp.8–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtovic-Kozaric, A., L. Mehinovic, R. Malesevic, S. Mesanovic, T. Jaros, M. Stomornjak-Vukadin, M. Mackic-Djurovic, S. Ibrulj, I. Kurtovic-Basic and M. Kozaric. 2016. Ten-Year trends in prevalence of down syndrome in a developing country: Impact of the maternal age and prenatal screening. European Journal Of Obstetrics & Gynecology And Reproductive Biology 206: 79–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, K., and S.A. Walls-Ingram. 2010. Selective abortion for down syndrome: The relation between the quality of intergroup contact, parenting expectations, and willingness to terminate. Journal Of Applied Social Psychology 40 (3): 554–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, K. L. 2006. Expectations of the parenting experience and willingness to consider selective termination for down syndrome Journal Of Reproductive And Infant Psychology 24: 43–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, T.Y., L.W. Chan, L.W. Law, D.S. Sahota, T.Y. Fung, T.N. Leung and T.K. Lau. 2009. First trimester combined screening for Trisomy 21 In Hong Kong: Outcome Of The First 10,000 Cases. The Journal Of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 22 (4): 300–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, A. 1991. Prenatal genetic testing and screening: constructing needs and reinforcing inequalities. American Journal Of Law And Medicine 17(1/2): 15–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loane, M., J.K. Morris, M.-C. Addor, L. Arriola, J. Budd, B. Doray, E. Garne, M. Gatt, M. Haeusler, B. Khoshnood, K. Klungsoyr Melve, A. Latos-Bielenska, B. Mcdonnell, C. Mullaney, M. O'mahony, A. Queiser-Wahrendorf, J. Rankin, A. Rissmann, C. Rounding, J. Salvador, D. Tucker, D. Wellesley, L. Yevtushok & H. Dolk. 2013. Twenty-Year trends in the prevalence of down syndrome and other trisomies in Europe: Impact of maternal age and prenatal screening. European Journal of Human Genetics, 21 (1): 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macmillan, M., M. Tarrant, C. Abraham and C. Morris. 2014. The Association between children's contact with people with disabilities and their attitudes towards disability: A systematic review. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 56 (6): 529–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malek, J. 2010. Deciding against disability: Does the use of reproductive genetic technologies express disvalue for people with disabilities? Journal Of Medical Ethics 36 (4): 217–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marteau, T.M., and H. Drake. 1995. Attributions for disability: The influence of genetic screening, Social Science And Medicine 40 (8): 1127–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, S., C. Bower, and P. O'leary. 2015. Impact of prenatal screening and diagnostic testing on trends in down syndrome births and terminations in Western Australia 1980 To 2013. Prenatal Diagnosis 35 (13): 1324–1330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcguinness, S. 2013. Law, reproduction, and disability: Fatally ‘Handicapped’? Medical Law Review 21: 213–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minear, M.A., C. Lewis, S. Pradhan, and S. Chandrasekharan. 2015. Global perspectives on clinical adoption of Nipt. Prenatal Diagnosis, 35 (10), Pp.959–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, T.F. 2011. When choosing the traits of children is hurtful to others. Journal Of Medical Ethics 37 (2): 105–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bioethics, Nuffield Council On. 2017. Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing: Ethical Issues. London: Nuffield Council On Bioethics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parens, E., and A. Asch. 1999. The disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing. The Hastings Center Report 29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parens, E., and A. Asch. 2003. Disability rights critique of prenatal genetic testing: Reflections and recommendations. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 9 (1): 40–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T.F., L.R. Tropp, U. Wagner & O. Christ. 2011. Recent Advances In intergroup contact theory. International Journal Of Intercultural Relations 35 (3): 271–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandel, M. 2007. The case against perfection: Ethics IN THE AGE OF GENETIC ENGINEering. Cambridge: Belknap Press Of Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, T. 1999. Losing the plot: Medical and activist discourses of contemporary genetics and disability, Sociology Of Health And Illness 21 (5): 669–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, T. 2014. Disability rights and wrongs revisited. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, T.W. 2011. Choices, reasons and feelings: Prenatal diagnosis as disability dilemma. Alter-European Journal Of Disability Research/Revue Européenne De Recherche Sur Le Handicap 5 (1): 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slotko, B.G., S.P. Levin, and R. Goldstein. 2011. Self-perceptions from people with down syndrome. American Journal of Medical Genetics 155: 2360–2369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slotko, B.G., Levin S.P., Macklin, E.A., and R.D. Goldstein. 2016. Family perspectives about down syndrome, American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 170a: 930–941.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staniland, L. 2011. Public perceptions of disabled people: Evidence from The British Social Attitudes Survey 2009. London: Office For Disability Issues Hm Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Schendel, R.V., A. Kater-Kuipers, E.H. Van Vliet-Lachotzki, W.J. Dondorp, M.C. Cornel, and L. Henneman. 2017. What do parents of children with Down Syndrome think about non-invasive prenatal testing (Nipt)? Journal of Genetic Counseling 26 (3): 522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanstone, M., C. King, B. De Vrijer, and J. Nisker. 2014. Non-invasive preantal testing: Ethics and policy consequences. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of Canada 36 (6): 515–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, L., J. Howarth, and J. Rodgers. 2002. Difference and choice: Exploring prenatal testing and the use of genetic information with people with learning difficulties. British Journal Of Learning Disabilities 30: 50–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A.C., & S. Taylor. 2014. Advocacy by parents of young children with special needs: Activities, processes, and perceived effectiveness. Journal Of Social Service Research 40 (5): 591–605.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty Of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

    Louise D Bryant

  2. International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK

    Tom Shakespeare

Authors
  1. Louise D Bryant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tom Shakespeare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom Shakespeare .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Program in Biomedical Ethics Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA

    Megan A. Allyse

  2. Department of Bioethics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Marsha Michie

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bryant, L.D., Shakespeare, T. (2022). The Impact of Prenatal Screening on Disability Communities and the Meaning of Disability. In: Allyse, M.A., Michie, M. (eds) Born Well: Prenatal Genetics and the Future of Having Children. The International Library of Bioethics, vol 88. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82536-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation