Given the controversial nature of the subject and the diversity within our working group, it is not surprising that we could not reach consensus about all of the questions we discussed. We did not reach consensus about what weigh to give or how best to use the disability arguments about prenatal genetic testing in making public policy. Nor did we concur more specifically about whether it is wise public policy to draw lines between reasonable and unreasonable tests. Second, to the extent that we achieved consensus about the merits of some of its claims, we recommended changes to ameliorate some of the problems associated with the customary ways of providing prenatal testing. In what has to be one of the most fascinating reports yet of true mainstream attitudes about disability, Oregon Health Sciences University's Nancy Press discusses data she and a colleague collected through interviews with a group of pregnant women who had no real likelihood of bearing a child with a disability but who had nonetheless all been offered prenatal screening.
Life Goes On.
When questioned about bearing a disabled child, though, responses changed dramatically.