|
|
 |
|
Information
Resource Library
Abortion and disability |
| |
|
| |
CONCLUSIONS
AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
In drawing conclusions from our study, on the basis of the
research we have carried out, we would like to draw attention
to issues where we can be fairly certain about what young
people think, and areas where we think more research needs
to be done.
1. We can say with some certainty that the vast majority of
students believe that abortion should be legal, and dislike
the idea of the law dictating a course of action for the pregnant
woman (see responses to survey question 1(b) (2) (4) and (5)).
A dislike of the idea of the law prohibiting abortion altogether
is perhaps demonstrated in the fact that even a significant
minority of those students who call themselves 'pro-life'
do not think abortion should be illegal in all circumstances
(see responses to survey question 1(b), (2) and (3)). This
'liberal' attitude towards the law among young people can
be put down to the fact that they are very non-judgmental
in their outlook. Young people dislike making judgements about
others, and do not like the idea of saying categorically that
one course of action is right, and another is wrong. As a
result they react against the idea of the law or the government
being able to compel pregnant women to act in a particular
way, on the basis of a judgement about what should be the
end result of pregnancy.
On this basis, we would argue that pro-choice ideas will
meet with most resonance with young people, when the case
is made against the law prohibiting abortion and support is
asked for on the grounds that it is unacceptable to compel
a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, through use
of legal measures.
2. At the same time, we can also be fairly certain that there
is only limited positive support for the idea of the right
to choose. While prohibitions on abortion are disliked, the
idea that women being able to have abortion is a 'good thing'
is not a common outlook among young people. Few young people
identify positively with the 'right to choose', and a significant
number, including some 'pro-choice' students, believe there
should be some limits placed on the right to choose (see responses
to survey question (3) and responses to interview question
(1)). Where students think there should be a limit on the
right to choose, they suggest the need for more education,
or counselling to bring this about, rather than legal measures
(see responses to interview question (1)). We would suggest
that the lack of positive support for the right to choose
arises from a broader reaction against individualism and individual
choice. The idea of putting your interests first, above those
of others, is perceived negatively, in comparison to the values
of selflessness and concern for others, which have positive
connotations for young people. In this context, the woman
having an abortion because she does not want a child is identified
as 'selfish'.
On this basis, we would argue that the case for the choice
to have an abortion needs to be restated, unapologetically,
as a positive good. Increasing the ability for women to exercise
choice about the circumstances of pregnancy is a goal society
should have, because the more women can choose, the more they
can be in control of their lives. Unlike the response suggested
in (1) above, which will find agreement with young people,
we would expect an unapologetic defence of individual choice
in abortion to meet with some resistance. It can be pointed
out that the grounds on which both points are made is consistent,
and rests on a desire to encourage individual freedom, which
includes freedom from the law regulating decision making in
abortion.
3. We can also say with some certainty that abortion for abnormality
is something young people do not feel comfortable with, although
they do not think it should be illegal (see responses to survey
question (4) and interview questions (2) (3) and (4)). Abortion
for abnormality is thought to be understandable in some cases,
although most young people think it wrong to have an abortion
purely because the child would be disabled. Many students
believed that the decision whether to abort an abnormal fetus
should be based around the welfare of the child, and the quality
of life a child will have (see responses to survey question
(6) and interview questions (2) (3) and (4). Abortion where
the parents simply did not want a disabled child was often
labelled 'selfish' (see responses to interview questions (2)
(3) and (4)). This perception of abortion for abnormality
is linked the concern young people have about 'too much choice'
raised in point 2. However, it is also shaped decisively by
young people's perceptions of disability in general, and their
attitudes towards science, technology and the future (see
responses to survey questions (6) and (7) and interview questions
(2) (3) and (4)), perceptions and attitudes which those from
a pro-choice outlook need to understand better.
We now summarise our analysis of these attitudes to disability
that young people have, drawn from our research. Further research
which is more precise needs to take place to assess which
of the following points are the most influential and decisive.
On this basis, pro-choice campaigners could formulate a response
based on an accurate understanding of the reasoning behind
young people's discomfort with abortion for abnormality.
- Young people express a dislike of 'consumerism' and 'too
much choice'. They think that people can wrongly expect to
be able to have anything they want, including a 'perfect child'.
- Young people think that disability has positive as well
as negative aspects and that society should value the special
talents and caring nature of many disabled people, particularly
Down's syndrome children are thought to have.
- Young people perceive disability to be an attribute or form
of identity, akin to gender or skin colour, rather than as
a disease or illness.
- The issue of disability is conceptualised by young people
as an equality or rights issue, rather than as a health issue.
This means there is concern that abortion for abnormality
could be, or at least could encourage, discrimination against
disabled people.
- Young people express fears about the so-called 'slippery
slope' where they suggest abortion for abnormality could lead
to sex selection, or abortion on the grounds of hair and eye
colour.
- Young people have fears about the implications of science
and technology in genetics. They are concerned about the potential
consequences of genetic manipulation, on the grounds that
it is 'against nature' and may spin out of control.
A suggestion for further research
Research could be carried out to take our findings further,
based on sensitivity to the points raised above. It would
aim to find out which attitudes to disability most influence
the young, and the relationship between these attitudes to
disability, and attitudes to abortion for abnormality. To
be effective, such research would be guided by the following:
1) It would need to have as its starting point an
assessment of young people's attitudes towards disability,
rather than abortion.
In our research, attitudes towards abortion in general, and
specifically about abortion law dominated, and the identification
of young people with the terms pro-choice and pro-life was
the overriding framework for the research. Their views on
abortion for abnormality were assessed in this light. In contrast,
more detail about attitudes to abortion for abnormality could
be obtained by assessing at the outset students attitudes
to disability (rather than abortion).
Such research would measure the importance attached to:
providing more resources for the disabled;
encouraging the idea that disabled people enhance society
as a whole;
encouraging the idea that Down's syndrome people enhance society
as a whole;
disability perceived as a medical issue;
disability perceived as a social issue;
having the ability to detect abnormality pre-birth (on a range
of conditions);
having the ability to detect characteristics (such as eye
and hair colour) pre-birth;
the development of a greater number of ante-natal screening
programmes for abnormality;
the development of greater knowledge about human genetics;
education programmes in schools about disability.
2) It would then measure the response to the variables
listed above against possible attitudes to abortion.
This would allow the research to assess the degree of balance
or conflict between attitudes to disability and attitudes
to abortion for abnormality. The relative importance of each
of the above factors could be assessed by correlating each
in relation to the degree of liberalism about abortion. As
a result, the attitudes to disability which most counter or
most encourage a liberal approach to abortion could be measured.
Attitudes to abortion which the above variables could be measured
against are:
identification as pro-choice or pro-life;
the desirability of legal abortion for abnormality:
support for the legality of abortion for abnormality (for
a range of conditions);
positive support for abortion for abnormality
the desirability of legal abortion for abnormality as the
law currently suggests (with no time limit):
support for a list of abnormalities for which abortion is
legal;
3) Our final suggestion would be to carry out further
group interview based research, but through this research,
to assess whether young people's opinions change, according
the information they receive.
In our research, we found the 'focus group' approach very
useful in allowing young people to formulate and develop their
opinions. Through their discussions with each other in a group,
their views became expressed more clearly. We would suggest
that this format is useful where complex issues that may not
be already clearly thought through by the research subjects
are being investigated. In future research, we would repeat
the group interviews, but use this exercise to assess how
opinion changes. This could be done by group interviewing
(for example) before and after young people are given information
about the effect of certain conditions on the lives of those
who have these conditions; before an after they see a film
about women who opted for abortion for abnormality; before
and after they were given information from those who oppose
abortion for abnormality. This could allow an assessment to
be made about which information has the greatest effect on
opinion.
Back to contents page |
| |
|
|
|
|
