New pre-natal testing is 'state-sponsored eugenics', says Dominic Lawson

New pre-natal testing for Down's syndrome is akin to "state-sponsored eugenics", a leading journalist has argued.

Dominic Lawson's article, written for the Daily Mail, comes after Conservative MP Nigel Evans warned David Cameron last week that rather than reduce the number of miscarriages, the new test will have"the unintended consequence of increasing the number of abortions for those with Down's syndrome".

Currently 9 in 10 expectant mothers who are told their child will have Down's syndrome choose to abort.

Cell-free DNA testing, more commonly known as non-invasive pre-natal testing (NIPT) is hailed as being less invasive than amniocentesis, another pre-natal test which can sometimes cause miscarriages as it involves a needle being inserted into the womb. Yet if it becomes widespread, a further 92 abortions may be caused by the new test.
 

Number of concerns raised 

Mr Lawson joins Christian Concern and a significant number of others that have previously raised concerns about the new pre-natal test, which has been approved for use and is said to be almost 99% effective in detecting Down's syndrome in an unborn child.

Mr Lawson, whose own daughter Domenica has the condition, believes that this new medical campaign has a hidden agenda, which, he says, is "state-sponsored eugenics".

When he and his wife decided not to abort their child when given the diagnosis that she would have Down's, popular ex-NHS nurse and 'agony aunt' Claire Rayner wrote an article criticising them for not undergoing pre-natal screening. She said that society would have to bear the burden of the "misery" of their daughter's life.
 

Double standard? 

Mr Lawson draws a powerful comparison between abortion on the basis of Down's syndrome, and that of gender; which is not uncommon in India.

"[I]n this country, we regard the selective abortion of females as abhorrent. For this reason, the NHS refuses to carry out abortions on grounds of gender and will also not carry out screening solely for the purpose of identifying the child's sex.

But in justifying its own screening and termination of Down's babies, is it behaving any differently to practices we regard as wicked when carried out in the subcontinent?"
 

'Sheer enthusiasm for life'

He says that doctors insist "on talking about Down's syndrome as if it were a disease, like cancer — when in fact it is just a different way of life."

Speaking of his family's experience with Domenica, he says he is"constantly energised by her own sheer enthusiasm for life, not to mention her unfailing ability to see the comic side of almost everything."

In conclusion, he asks: "Would the world be a better place without people with Down's syndrome? Without people such as my daughter?"
 

Actively protecting life

Writing for The Gospel Coalition website, Matt Chandler encourages us as Christians to be more active in protecting the value of every God-given life.

All of us have a responsibility to pray, he says, but he also suggests ideas for taking practical steps, such as writing to MPs about issues such as abortion and pre-natal testing, and actively supporting ministries that serve women in crisis pregnancies.

"If we're saying the former [abortion is killing] without the latter [we will serve you], we aren't truly understanding the gospel. And if we're claiming we're pro-life yet doing nothing about it, we not only aren't truly understanding the gospel; we're not truly pro-life," he writes.

Related Links: 
Would the world be a better place without people like my daughter? Dominic Lawson likens the new test for Down's syndrome to State-sponsored eugenics (Mail) 
Are You Nominally Pro-Life? (The Gospel Coalition) 
Rally held to protest new pre-natal screening  
US state facing legal action over law banning Down's Syndrome abortions