![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Ableism and Eugenicism
Dec. 30th, 2015 05:39 pmIn any discussion of eugenics, 4 out of 5 abled people will say it’s not eugenics, and 9 out of 10 will say it’s a good thing.
This isn't about the sometimes-awkward intersection of anti-eugenicism and reproductive rights. This is about the idea that the way to address disability issues is to eliminate certain groups of people, rather than to try to include and accommodate all people. This scares me.
In any discussion of eugenicism, abled people will speak over disabled people, and silence disabled people, to decide whose life is worth living.
Abled people don’t generally have the knowledge or the moral authority to say we should eliminate some inborn condition among disabled people. Disabled people, living with that particular condition, may have the knowledge and moral authority, and we may disagree with each other. Abled people, if anything, have an obligation to en-able those they have previously dis-abled.
This isn't about the sometimes-awkward intersection of anti-eugenicism and reproductive rights. This is about the idea that the way to address disability issues is to eliminate certain groups of people, rather than to try to include and accommodate all people. This scares me.
In any discussion of eugenicism, abled people will speak over disabled people, and silence disabled people, to decide whose life is worth living.
Abled people don’t generally have the knowledge or the moral authority to say we should eliminate some inborn condition among disabled people. Disabled people, living with that particular condition, may have the knowledge and moral authority, and we may disagree with each other. Abled people, if anything, have an obligation to en-able those they have previously dis-abled.
