Issues on Abortion

Seto and Ser oppose the views that Teo has regarding the abortion of babies with disabilities. What are your views regarding this issue?

Abortion still remains an extremely controversial topic for discussion in most corners of the Earth. It is a tough issue as it concerns definition of life, which many people have different views upon and many cannot answer. It also challenges religious beliefs of many.

In my opinion, there is no definite answer to whether a severely disabled baby would be able to contribute to the society in the future, as no one can prognosticate what is going to happen in 20 years’ time. Mr. Teo is right in the sense that there is a high possibility that a severely disabled child would bring suffering to its family. I agree that if it were to be born, the family will be “financially strained on account of medical expenses” and extra investments that the family has to make, for instance, special equipments to ensure that they lead a life as normal as possible. Also, city planners have to include particular facilities and infrastructures, such as more lifts for defective people and ramps for wheelchair users, on their blueprints. In this sense, they indeed form a burden for the rest of the family members. Also, they pose a burden to the country. In addition, there is great possibility that they would be discriminated against in society. It would be cruel to bring them into the world only to letting them suffer. Critics mentioned that parents could always give children up for adoption. However, there is extremely low possibility that others would adopt a severely disabled child.

Mr. Felix Ser Cherk Yen commented that a child with Down’s syndrome could still learn how to draw well and contribute his physical labour. However, there is little chance that they would be employable. Majority of the population would relate disabilities, be it physical or metal, to low or even no productivity, inefficiency and ineffectiveness. We cannot ignore the fact that they do need special care and assistance in their daily work. Most companies are operating for profits and it is unlikely that they would be willing to pay to build special facilities for employees with defects. Although, there may be some companies, which take in disabled workers, they constitute the minority in society.

Therefore, based on this series of analysis, the government should consider legalizing the abortion of severely defected babies after 24 weeks of pregnancy so long as the mother’ life is not at risk. Moreover, legalization does not mean compulsory abortion of severely defective babies. It simply means that parents have a choice to carry on with the pregnancy or to terminate it. If the family is mentally and finically prepared for their arrival, and is willing to support and take care of the defected babies, no one would have the right to stop them from bring the babies into this world.

On the other hand, we cannot ignore the religious beliefs of many in Singapore. Christians worship sanctity of life. They believe that all lives are worthy of being taken care of and every person, including the fetus, irrespective of his/her health statuses, has the right to live. We cannot say that they are wrong or irresponsible for bringing a severely defective life into the world at the expense of other people’s interest and happiness. Everyone has a belief to follow, including Mr. Seto Hann Hoi and me. My religion teaches me to respect and value life. It forbids abortion as well because life begins at conception and it is a sin to destroy it. However, if we were to avoid emphasizing the religious influence on the issue on abortion, I would incline more towards Mr. Teo’s stand.

In Singapore, we may consider allowing people to vote to decide whether abortion of severely defected babies after 24 weeks of pregnancy when the mother’s life is not at risk since Singapore is a democratic nation.