Fletcher J
N Engl J Med. 1975 Jan 9;292(2):75-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197501092920205.
Growing use of abortion to prevent births of infants with unfavorable prenatal diagnoses raises ethical questions about active euthanasia for newborn infants with similar impairments. Two opposing ethical arguments are those of Paul Ramsey, who equates genetically indicated abortion with infanticide disapprovingly, and of Joseph Fletcher, who equates the morality of abortion with selective euthanasia approvingly. Though radically different, these arguments treat the ethical aspects of the prenatal and postnatal situations as essentially similar. There are, however, different moral features between the two situations, in that the postnatal situation is characterized by the independent physical existence of the infant, the possibility of treatment, and the formation of parental loyality to the infant. Thus, a decision for abortion after prenatal diagnosis does not necessarily commit parents to euthanasia in the management of a seriously damaged infant.
越来越多地使用堕胎来避免患有不利产前诊断的婴儿出生,引发了关于对有类似缺陷的新生儿实施主动安乐死的伦理问题。两种对立的伦理观点分别来自保罗·拉姆齐(他不赞成地将基于基因诊断的堕胎等同于杀婴)和约瑟夫·弗莱彻(他赞成地将堕胎的道德性等同于选择性安乐死)。尽管这两种观点截然不同,但它们都将产前和产后情况的伦理层面视为本质上相似。然而,这两种情况存在不同的道德特征,因为产后情况的特点是婴儿独立的身体存在、治疗的可能性以及父母对婴儿忠诚情感的形成。因此,产前诊断后决定堕胎并不一定使父母在处理严重受损婴儿时选择安乐死。