Are We Choosing Which Lives Deserve To Be Born? The Quiet Genocide

Advancements in prenatal screening have enabled early detection of genetic conditions like Down syndrome. But in some parts of the world, this progress has quietly led to the near-eradication of individuals with the condition — long before birth.
In Iceland, around 85% of expectant mothers undergo first-trimester genetic screening. Nearly 100% of those who receive a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome choose to terminate the pregnancy. Only two or three babies with the condition are born there each year.
Denmark reports a termination rate of over 95%. In France, it's around 77%. These numbers have sparked concern among ethicists and disability advocates, who warn of a troubling cultural shift: one that frames the existence of disability as undesirable — and preventable.
The American Context
In the United States, where prenatal screening is optional and unstandardized, the termination rate after a Down syndrome diagnosis ranges from 60% to 90%, depending on geography, access to care, and socioeconomic status.
Despite these figures, advocacy groups like the National Down Syndrome Society (NDSS) offer a different perspective. According to their 2022 Fact Sheet, life expectancy for individuals with Down syndrome has risen from 25 years in 1983 to more than 60 years today. People with the condition increasingly live independent lives, attend school, hold jobs, and contribute meaningfully to their communities.
'Contemporary Eugenics' and the Role of NIPT
The AMA Journal of Ethics has raised a pressing question: Are today's prenatal screening practices — particularly non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) — a modern form of eugenics?
Unlike the coercive eugenics of the 20th century, contemporary eugenics doesn't require state enforcement. It operates subtly through individual decisions, medical norms, and cultural assumptions about what kinds of lives are 'worth living.' NIPT, which detects chromosomal conditions like Down syndrome as early as 10 weeks, may give the illusion of 'informed choice' while implicitly devaluing disability.
'Even making screening available for Down syndrome… is already, by definition, suggesting that they are not valued reproductive outcomes,' the article states.
The concern, as the authors put it, is that society may be shrinking the definition of 'normal' while expanding the definition of 'abnormal' — a shift driven not by malice, but by medicine, convenience, and silence.
Frank Stephens: A Voice for the Valued
That silence was broken in a viral speech by disability advocate Frank Stephens, who has Down syndrome and testified before Congress:
'I would like to make three points. First, we are a medical gift to society — a blueprint for medical research into cancer, Alzheimer's, and immune system disorders.
'Second, we are an unusually powerful source of happiness. A Harvard-based study found that people with Down syndrome, as well as their parents and siblings, are happier than society at large. Surely happiness is worth something.
'Finally, we are the canary in the eugenics coal mine. We are giving the world a chance to think about the ethics of choosing which humans get a chance at life.'
His testimony reframes the conversation: not just about disability, but about who gets counted as human — and what it means when entire categories of people begin to disappear.
A Local Voice of Compassion
Monty Bennett, a Dallas-based hotelier and philanthropist, is also the Publisher of The Dallas Express. But for Bennett, advocacy on behalf of children with disabilities is not just professional — it's personal.
As the father of a special needs child, Bennett has witnessed both the challenges and the beauty of raising a child the world doesn't always understand. His experience has shaped his lifelong commitment to supporting and defending the value of every human life.
'Every life has a divine purpose, regardless of what chromosomes they carry,' Bennett told The Dallas Express. 'As the father of a special needs child, I've seen the challenges — and the incredible joy — that come with raising someone the world often overlooks. It breaks my heart to think of how many lives — full of love, dignity and joy — are quietly erased before they ever get a chance.
'Our son is an incredible blessing,' he added. 'If society measured value not by perfection but by compassion, children like him would be at the top of every list.'
Bennett has long supported the development of early childhood programs that serve children with Down syndrome and other developmental disabilities. His philanthropy reflects a broader conviction — that children born with special needs deserve not just protection, but opportunities to thrive in a world that too often doubts their worth.
Reframing the Future
Disability rights advocates say the real danger isn't just the test — it's the unspoken cultural script that surrounds it. Campaigns like 'Don't Screen Us Out' warn that prenatal screening, especially when not accompanied by balanced counseling, becomes a method of informal eugenics.
Choice, they argue, is only meaningful when society embraces the full spectrum of life — and supports parents, no matter the diagnosis.
As prenatal technology advances, we're forced to reckon with what it reveals about us: Are we simply diagnosing? Or are we deciding who gets to be born?

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

New York Post

2 hours ago

• New York Post

Grieving parents awarded $2.25M after Georgia doctor plastered videos of their decapitated baby on social media

A Georgia couple whose baby was decapacitated during childbirth was awarded a $2.25 million verdict after their pathologist posted graphic autopsy videos on social media without their consent. Dr. Jackson Gates and his Atlanta-based business will have to fork over the large sum to Jessica Ross and Traveon Taylor Sr. after a Fulton County jury found him liable of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and fraud on Wednesday. 'This young couple trusted him with the remains of their precious baby,' attorney's for the grieving parents said, noting that the doctor 'poured salt into the couple's already deep wounds.' 3 Jessica Ross and Treveon Taylor Sr., parents of a baby who was decapitated during childbirth. AP 'Gates, in turn, repaid this trust by posting horrific images of their child for the world to see.' The heartbroken couple hired the twisted doctor to perform an autopsy on their deceased newborn two days after their obstetrician allegedly applied excessive force to the baby's neck when its shoulders became stuck in Ross's pelvic area, causing it to detach during the traumatic July 2023 delivery. 3 The traumatic delivery occurred at Southern Regional Medical Center in July 2023. ERIK S LESSER/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock The baby's head was delivered vaginally, but the rest of the body was removed via C-section. The death was later ruled a homicide. Gates posted numerous videos and photos to his Instagram later that month, showing the grisly postmortem examination of their infants 'decapitated, severed head,' the couple said in their lawsuit. The deranged pathologist initially removed the footage after receiving a letter from the couple's attorney — but later reposted them, according to the lawsuit. 3 The couple was awarded $2.25 million in a lawsuit against their pathologist. AP Gates' attorney, Ira Livant, said his client typically documents his autopsy's on social media to educate fellow pathologists and highlight the importance of independent examinations in cases where families suspect medical misconduct. 'Dr. Gates testified that he is deeply sorry for any harm that he unintentionally caused the plaintiffs,' Livant said Saturday. 'Had he known for one second that they would see that and that they would know it was their child, he would never have done it.' The couple will receive $2 million in compensatory damages and an additional $250,000 in punitive damages from Gates and his company, Medical Diagnostics Choices, per the judgement. The bereaved parents have separate lawsuits pending against the delivering doctor and the Riverdale hospital where the horrific incident took place. With Post wires.

UPI

5 hours ago

• UPI

NIH office to phase out HIV guidelines by next year

The National Institutes of Health office responsible for issuing federal guidelines related to treatment of HIV and AIDS patients in the United States is making major changes. File Photo by Annabelle Gordon/UPI | License Photo June 21 (UPI) -- The National Institutes of Health office responsible for issuing federal guidelines related to treatment of HIV and AIDS patients in the United States is making major changes. The NIH Office of AIDS Research or OAR told its employees this week it intends to phase out the guidelines by next June, the Washington Post reported, citing an internal staff email. According to the office, OAR "coordinates HIV/AIDS research across the National Institutes of Health and provides the largest public investment in HIV/AIDS research globally." "In the climate of budget decreases and revised priorities, OAR is beginning to explore options to transfer management of the guidelines to another agency within" the letter obtained by The Post reads. The OAR guidelines contain guidelines related to diagnosis and treatments of HIV and AIDS. There are currently more than 1 million people living with HIV in the United States. It was not immediately clear what the other agency referred to in the letter was or how such a move may affect the guideline, the Post reported. The news comes as President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio move to cut over $8 billion from the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID and merge it into the State Department. State Department officials say the move comes with the expectation that other countries will increase their roles in delivering aid around the world. An April report published in the Lancet medical journal found around half a million children globally could die from AIDS by 2030 if the United States cuts its global relief funding. Earlier this week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved use of the HIV drug lenacapavir, which is produced by California-based biopharma firm Gilead Sciences under the name Yeztugo. "Yeztugo is one of the most important scientific breakthroughs of our time and offers a very real opportunity to help end the HIV epidemic," Gilead Science Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Daniel O'Day said in a statement on the company's website

Yahoo

11 hours ago

• Yahoo

Harvard researcher's work gives ‘hope' for Parkinson's. But the feds cut his funding

When Bence Ölveczky came to the U.S. from Hungary at the age of 28, it was the first place he didn't feel like a foreigner. 'This is a unique country because it's a country of immigrants. And that's why I felt at home; because nobody cared,' he told MassLive, during a recent interview in his office. The U.S. drew him because of its 'unparalleled scientific infrastructure' and collaboration between the government and its universities. However, it feels like the climate is changing. 'It's made America great,' Ölveczky, who holds a Ph.D. , said. 'And now we are sort of willingly giving up on that. That's the tragic part of this.' As a professor of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University, he is feeling the ways the Trump administration is attacking not only the institution where he works but also his research. " The research that we are doing — it is not Harvard research," he said. ' We are doing government research.' The Trump administration has frozen or cut nearly $3 billion in federal funding to Harvard, citing antisemitism at the university. The administration has claimed the university failed to protect Jewish students, particularly in the wake of the war in Gaza. Read more: Federal judge delays decision over Trump admin barring Harvard foreign students At the same time, the federal government has revoked most of the institutions' research grants. This has a significant impact on Ölveczky's lab, which uses rats to better understand how the brain learns new motor skills and generates more complex behaviors. It also has the potential to affect an entire generation of researchers who may decide not to come to the U.S. or to Harvard because of the federal government's actions, he said. Two of his federal grants were terminated by the National Institutes of Health in May. His lab focuses on addressing the function of the basal ganglia, which goes awry in people with Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease, according to a court filing in an ongoing lawsuit against the Trump administration. With more time, his work could help inform rehabilitation therapeutics for people with those diseases or even those who have had strokes, he said. 'It's an inspiration to me that we could help in the treatment of these,' he said. Taking an elevator to the basement in a Harvard building, passing through white door after white door, there are several rooms filled with rats. Some are kept in clear cages behind closed cabinets. Opening one of the cabinets, two black and white rats in separate cages appear. One with wires attached to its head immediately walks to the front of its clear cage to put its nose and minuscule teeth through a hole at the front. Other rats are stacked high, while not undergoing testing or recuperating from surgery, sometimes even doubled up in a cage for socialization, snuggled up next to each other. Each rat is taught a task. One task is pressing down on a joystick at a certain angle for a reward. 'Some of these animals have been in their training for a year or more,' Ölveczky said. The rats do these tasks so the researchers can better understand how complex behaviors are generated by the brain. However, the lab is also researching how autism affects brain function and behavior. They had planned to apply for federal funding for this work, which has been privately funded that is ending this year. Read more: As federal funding cuts hit Harvard, a private investment firm and other donors step up In collaboration with the University of Washington, Stanford University and the Salk Institute, the lab has also created a virtual rodent controlled through an artificial neural network, according to Ölveczky's court affidavit. It is able to be trained to mimic the behavior of real animals and has the potential to transform how researchers study the brain by comparing hypothesis testing through the virtual rodent and juxtaposing it to experiments in real animals, he said. By studying rats at the Ölveczky Lab, it is also ultimately about giving families who are struggling with Parkinson's or stroke hope for recovery, he said. 'To some degree, knowing that there are people out there working on the mechanisms that underlie the disease, particularly for neurodevelopmental disorders like autism or childhood disorders ... I think give folks hope,' he said There is so much more that could be learned in the lab, Ölveczky said. Nobody knew that studying the saliva of a lizard would lead to the 'most revolutionary obesity drug,' he said, referring to Ozempic. 'The bargain this country made was to invest in basic research and understand that the rewards are going to accumulate over time. And this is also why normal tax-paying Americans won't necessarily feel the immediate effects of any of these funding cuts,' he said. 'What you would have to do is compare the alternative reality — the reality when there was no research — versus the reality where there is research, and those two are very different. But that would become apparent in some years from now," he said. Ölveczky has been looking for non-federal funding. However, that is even more difficult as other institutions are experiencing a scaling back of funding as well. The lab may not be able to finish its experiments, analyze its data or write publications without federal funding, according to Ölveczky's affidavit. Slashing research funding isn't about saving money for the U.S., Ölveczky said. In fact, it has the opposite effect, he said. 'This is the most wasteful thing that's happened to biomedical research. You build up a research enterprise, and it takes an incredible amount of money to gain the trust of the world, frankly. Everybody's coming here,' he said. 'The fact that this is done in the name of sort of eliminating waste is just absurd,' he said. Using 'rainy day' funds given to him from his promotion a decade ago, he has been able to keep staff on — but these funds will dry up within the year, he said. He runs a lab with 10 to 12 people. His grants largely funded the salaries of postdoctoral students and technicians, reagents, animal care costs, instruments and publication costs. Being forced to let them go would be devastating, as they have institutional knowledge about the lab and how it works. Even if he were to later find funding, those people would be difficult to replace, and ultimately it would take time and more money to get them up to speed, he said in an affidavit. Read more: 'Far reaching consequences' — UMass Amherst sounds the alarm amid federal uncertainty In addition to potential layoffs, around 100 rats would also have to be killed because the lab won't have the funding to keep going. He said he refuses 'to believe that people in Congress don't see' the impact the funding cuts will have on research. 'I hope we can reverse course, but the worry I have is when will some of these things become irreversible?' he said. Even if the cuts at Harvard don't happen, the proposed cuts at the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation through President Donald Trump's budget are going to be 'devastating,' Ölveczky said. 'There are two things going on — Harvard being targeted for political reasons and the whole scientific enterprise across the country being decimated. And that's going to have incredibly negative effects on the prosperity and the ability to push innovation and grow,' he said. It isn't like the United States is alone in its scientific progress; other countries like the U.K., Portugal, Sweden and Denmark are able to provide similarly enriching research environments, he said. It is challenging to encourage students and researchers to come to Harvard right now. 'Fundamentally, my biggest concern with this whole situation is that we're losing a generation of scientists,' Ölveczky said. There are postdoctoral students in his lab who are 'sacrificing a lot' to be in his lab, when they could work in the private research space and make more money. 'They're really devoted to pushing the frontiers of science,' he said. 'And those guys are being discouraged.' Read more: As Trump cuts funding, these Harvard scholars consider leaving US — and academia That is especially true for international students at Harvard, as the Trump administration has attempted to block Harvard international students from entering the country or enrolling at the institution. 'I have an incoming graduate student from Taiwan, who's phenomenal by all accounts, and I can't encourage him about this situation because the degree of uncertainty and anxiety associated with this whole situation is not something that I would necessarily want for myself if I had other options,' Ölveczky said. He is settled in the U.S. now as an American citizen. However, only a few short years ago, that wasn't the case. If he were 28 years old again and making the move again out of Hungary for his doctoral degree, he said there would be 'no chance' of him coming to the U.S. These US colleges are among the top 100 best global universities, US News says 'Far reaching consequences' — UMass Amherst sounds the alarm amid federal uncertainty MIT joins group of universities suing the DOD over funding cuts As federal funding cuts hit Harvard, a private investment firm and other donors step up 20 NIH grants restored to UMass system after judge rules against Trump admin Read the original article on MassLive.