Full Answer Section

Arguments Against Justificability:

• Slippery Slope Argument: Opponents argue that allowing eugenic infanticide opens a dangerous door to justifying the killing of individuals deemed “lesser” based on other potentially subjective criteria, like intelligence, race, or socioeconomic status.
• Right to Life Argument: Many moral frameworks place a high value on the fundamental right to life, regardless of potential suffering or future contributions. Terminating lives based on genetic predispositions violates this right, creating a dangerous precedent.
• Uncertainties and Errors: Diagnosing potential conditions and predicting future quality of life with certainty is challenging, raising concerns about potential misdiagnoses and wrongful killing of individuals who could lead fulfilling lives.
• Alternative Solutions: Investing in palliative care, pain management, and research into treatments for these conditions could improve the quality of life for affected individuals instead of resorting to infanticide.

Moral Considerations:

Beyond utilitarianism, broader moral considerations regarding autonomy, agency, and the inherent value of all human life come into play. Recognizing the inherent complexities of disability, understanding the subjective experience of living with such conditions, and respecting the autonomy of individuals and families to make informed decisions about their lives are crucial.

Conclusion:

While utilitarianism might offer a framework for analyzing the potential utility of eugenic infanticide, its application to such a sensitive issue raises serious ethical concerns and potential for societal harm. The inherent complexities of disability, the right to life, and the potential for misjudgment outweigh the utilitarian arguments. Ultimately, finding solutions that prioritize humane care, support for individuals and families, and ongoing research into treatments remain the most ethically and morally sound approaches to address such challenges.

It is important to note that this is a highly contested issue with no easy answers. This response aims to present a balanced perspective that considers both sides of the argument while emphasizing the importance of ethical considerations and respecting the inherent value of human life.