Questions 21～25
Any request in the United Kingdom to remove a disabled person’s ability to reproduce should be treated with great caution. The news that 15-year-old Katie Thorpe, who has severe cerebral palsy, may have a womb removal operation at her mother’s request should be a cause of great concern for disabled people.
This case raises profound legal and ethical dilemmas. Legally Katie should be assumed to be capable of making a decision and, if necessary, supported to do so before anyone else can decide what is or is not in her "best interests".
Ethically we have to remember that right through the 20th century many countries in Europe and beyond legislated positively in favor of sterilising disabled people, often without their knowledge—let alone their consent. As Judge Holmes famously put it in a landmark case in the United States less than a century ago, "three generations of imbeciles are enough".
With the shadow of this recent history still over us, we should exercise utmost caution before sanctioning decisions to remove any disabled woman’s reproductive right. The most effective path through both the legal and ethical dilemmas has to be to encourage self-determination on the part of disabled people such as Katie.
Of course, the rights and needs of careers need to be taken into account as well, but it is imperative that this is never at the expense of the disabled person’s own views.
The reason that this case has caused so much controversy is that, on initial inspection, it appears that an assumption is being made about what is best for a disabled person without attempting to understand the desires of the individual who will be ultimately affected by the decision.
Unfortunately, assumptions that limit disabled people’s lives are prevalent in our society, and the medical profession is not immune. I have come across cases where disabled people who personally believe they enjoy a good quality of life, have been told by doctors that they assume they would not want to be resuscitated in the event of respiratory failure. When the individuals tell the doctors that they would, of course, want to be resuscitated, they have been met with nothing but a puzzled look.
Not only does the UK disability network Radar advocate that all disabled people should be the authors of their own destiny, but that they should have the appropriate support in place to enable them to achieve their hopes and ambitions. This does not just mean going to the shops, or having a rewarding job, but it also means a right to relationships and to family life, which means ensuring self-determination is a key aspect of everyone’s existence.
These are the rights that non-disabled people take for granted, and they must be afforded to all if we are to live in an equal society.
We know that with the right support in place, true independent living is not only possible, but desirable both from a social and an economic perspective. Once we can live the lives that we want to live, we can encourage other disabled people to do the same. We all have ambitions, and we should all be enabled to fulfill them and inspire others.
Before we can achieve this, we must have the mechanisms in place to ensure that people like Katie, and all others who cannot easily express their needs and desires, are fully represented in the legal system and our society as a whole.
Life can be very difficult for parents who are also careers for their severely disabled children. But that does not mean that they always know what is in the best interests of their children. For all children, independence from their parents can be a hard-won right. For disabled young people, they may need support throughout their lives to achieve this. According to the passage, what is important for disabled people to fulfill their ambitions