CHOICE, CONSCIENCE, AND CONTEXT

In this commentary, Professor Crossley uses Professor Shapiro's Articl e as a springboard for considering two practices that increasingly are becoming part of the new reproductive landscape: selective reduction of multiple pregnancy and prenatal genetic testing to enable selective abortion. Professor Crossley considers how these practices might affe ct our understanding of personhood, particularly with respect to the t ypes of criticisms that Professor Shapiro addresses in his Article. Th e nature of the threat to personhood posed by the use of selective red uction depends on whether a couple pursuing aggressive infertility tre atment is fully informed, prior to commencing treatment, of the risks of multiple pregnancy and the availability of selective reduction; som e impact on our respect for persons, however,may occur in either scena rio. With respect to prenatal genetic testing, Professor Crossley arti culates arguments that the practice may erode the noncontingent bonds between parent and child, promote eugenic attitudes, and encourage red uctivism in how persons are understood in our society. Acknowledging t hat the concerns about the impact of selective reduction and prenatal testing are speculative, Professor Crossley's suggested response is to pay more attention to the context in which decisions about the use of new reproductive technologies are made. The purpose is to encourage t he shaping of contexts that will encourage informed, reflective, value s-based decision making. Aside from any possible impact on the substan tive outcome of decisions, simply engaging in the process of moral rea soning strengthens our personhood and thus buttresses it against any t hreats posed by the new reproductive technologies.