OPINION: Alex Ward.
Recently YouTube and social media influencer Jesse Ridgway revealed that he and his wife had decided to terminate their pregnancy after the genetic testing came back with a Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) diagnosis.
The decision of Ridgway and his wife, as tragic as it is, is all too common. In the United States, between 67%-85% of pregnancies with this diagnosis are terminated. In some European countries, children born with Down syndrome have become exceedingly rare. In Denmark (98%) and Iceland (100%) between 98-100% of pregnancies with a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome are terminated. In that context, Ridgway’s decision is part of a larger culture where such cruelty has come to seem reasonable.
In his explanation to his fans and followers, Ridgway said that he was optimistic when the test results first came back: “If they’re a little slow intellectually, then we’ll make it work. I signed on to be a parent, come what may … but I just didn’t fully understand what Down syndrome entailed.” But as he learned more, his outlook changed. The possibility that the child “would be fully dependent on others for the rest of their life” became central to their decision.
Jesse Ridgway’s explanation for the abortion of his child with Down syndrome reveals the cruel calculus of a hardened culture
Baked into his analysis is the assumption that people must move from dependence to independence as they mature. On one level, of course, parents should desire their children to become capable of caring for themselves. That is a natural and right attitude to have. But when taken to an extreme, it devalues anyone who fails to meet the standard to the point that they can be discarded. It says that for your life to be worthwhile, it must be one that could be lived alone, unhindered by a need for others. Parents may mourn the decision to terminate, in this view, but it’s the kinder option. Better non-existence than an existence of dependence.
When a culture becomes hardened enough to base the worth of children (or the elderly, infirm, or terminally ill) on their independence, then it is only natural to end or prevent their existence.
The test cannot reveal a child’s dignity. It can only reveal whether we are willing to recognize that dignity.
Though Ridgway and his wife did not disclose the kind of testing they underwent, many parents receive non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) early in pregnancy. These screenings assess the chance for chromosomal disorders, including Trisomy 21, Trisomy 18, and Trisomy 13. The tests are screenings, not diagnoses, so positive results require further testing for confirmation. But because NIPT is more accurate for Down syndrome, many couples treat it as decisive.
The testing is not inherently illicit. There is no moral problem with learning more about our children in the womb. NIPT procedures are offered early in pregnancy and can be—because they test for sex chromosome disorders—an early way of learning the sex of the child. Both times that my wife and I were expecting, she had a NIPT procedure to learn if we were having a boy or girl. In both instances, we made it clear to the OB-GYN that no matter the results we would not terminate the pregnancy. Had the test revealed a likelihood that the child had a genetic condition, we would have had time to prepare, learn, and even grieve what might not be.
However, in a culture that prioritizes independence, the test can become an early and sanitized version of sorting the worthy from the unworthy. Those who “pass” the test can go to the next level of personhood. Those who “fail,” well, they must wait for their parents to determine if they are willing to take on such a responsibility.
Christians should be clear, though, that the test cannot reveal a child’s dignity. It can only reveal whether we are willing to recognize that dignity.
Christians can choose not to participate in NIPT procedures because they would never terminate their pregnancy, no matter the diagnosis. Or they can choose to have the procedure so that they can learn and prepare. But there is no legitimate option to undergo a procedure with the goal of discarding a child they deem unworthy.
The goal should not be to see Down syndrome eliminated through abortions, as in parts of Western Europe. Rather, we should work for a culture where people are not discarded because of their ability, disability, or future dependence. A culture where we say of every child: “It is good that you exist.”
About the Author: Alex Ward serves as lead researcher for the ERLC. Alex is currently pursuing a PhD in history at the University of Mississippi studying evangelical political activity in the 20th century. He is married to Lindsey and they have one daughter.
