Aborting a Disabled Newborn Baby

Recently published in the Washington Post was an article titled, "The Abortion Debate No One Wants to Have." This article was written by a woman named Patricia E. Bauer. She is a former Post reporter and bureau chief. She had the task of finding out information on an issue about abortion. Her daughter, Margaret, is the topic of discussion in this article, which makes her know a lot about the topic. This article is asking if prenatal testing is making your right to abort a disabled child more like "your responsibility" to abort a disabled child. Patricia's daughter, Margaret, was born disabled. Many women these days are taking prenatal tests to see if their child is disabled, and many women are getting abortions because they find out that their child is going to be disabled. Patricia is arguing how she doesn't understand how society can write off a whole group of people as having no value. She says people want perfect family's, perfect lives, and perfect babies, but nobody's perfect. People shouldn't get rid of a baby because it isn't exactly the way they want it.

This author basically only tells one side of the debate. She talks about how it is wrong of people to not want disabled children being born into their families. She does not discuss the topic of the downsides to having a disabled child being born into a family and why it isn't right for everyone. She could have discussed the reason's why some family's might not want a disabled child being born. She sticks right to the idea that it is wrong to terminate the life of a disabled child. Patricia doesn't bring up all of the different points of view of others in her article. She defends her case for believing that it is wrong to abort a disabled child. She has a handicapped child of her own, and she loves her just as much and she is a normal human being. She believes every human being, whether disabled or not, has the right to live.

This author does not pass the test of bias. She is biased when it comes to this topic because she has a predisposition to how everyone should feel about aborting children with disabilities. She doesn't see the other side to the debate. The article is easy to read, it is only a few pages. It doesn't take very long to read over. She is a credible source because she has a daughter of her own with a disability. She uses her daughter as a main source to this article. The author doesn't discuss counterarguments and, therefore, has no sources of evidence for other arguments.

The author's argument development wasn't as effective as it could've been. The author could have stated the downsides to having a disabled child and say why some parents may chose to have an abortion because of that reason. The author was very biased in this article. She could have compared the pros and cons to having a disabled child. The author's argument development was poor.