Hi Maria,
I only said that the sentence of Tanis to say DAWN uphelds the principle
of choice is to simplistic. I didn't say there are not people in DAWN who
question whether choice is a reality
I know that people in DAWN and NAC question whether choice exist.
Cheers
Gregor
On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Maria Barile wrote:
>
>
> Sorry, Greg
> need to disagree with you . As I belive that at least untill 1992 I was part of
> those defining choice within DAWN. and in reading Y.Peters work you will note
> some of us have always questioned what choice meant and for whom. Far from
> simplistic DAWN and NAC struggled with the question of choice and all its
> contradictions.
> Maria
>
> Gregor Wolbring wrote:
>
> > Ok as Tani drags me into this I think I want to clarify some points
> >
> > On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Tanis M. Doe wrote:
> >
> > > In Canada the DisAbled Women's Movement has been consistent in upholding a
> > > woman's right to choose- to continue or abort a pregnancy. That is not,
> > > nor should it be related to the killing of babies.
> >
> > In Singer's mind the philosophy is everything which is a non person can be
> > killed. In the moment their is a difference between abortion and
> > infanticide purely for the reason that as soon as you are born you are
> > viewed as a person. Now starting from the assumption of Singer who
> > deserves to be a person indeed the boundary between abortion and
> > infanticide is falling apart. Also Singer says very clearly being a human
> > being does not start at birth but after cells can't devide into different
> > entities anymore. So if you want to uphold the boundary between
> > infanticide and abortion you have to deal with the arguments of the
> > personhood debate.
> > Just as a side comment (as the stuff writen by Tanis might leave the
> > impression that Dick Barb and I are not for choice. I apologize if I
> > misread you Tanis.). I find the comment
> > that
> > DAWN is upholding women's right to choose much to simplistic as choice
> > doesn't exist in the moment. Choice is the ability to choose between two
> > equally valid options. Obviously it's not the same whether to have a
> > disabled child or a non disabled child. I and many women
> > (e.g. Abby Lippman)question the notion that choice is solely based on
> > the person to say yes or no. It is based on the enviroment these women are
> > sitting in. I had and still have long debates with
> > people that there should not be a difference
> > between sex selection and disability selection something which was put
> > forward by the last Canadian Biotech billand by the Royal Commission on
> > NRT and which might appear again in the new Canadian Biotech Bill and
> > something which is the law
> > in Pennsylvania (funny that the Pennsylvania law which is Anti Choice was
> > not torn down by women groups who are in favour of choice).
> > This relates also to Judy's comment (Or should anyone who wants to have
> > an abortion first have to do pre-natal testing so that she can only
> > abort if the foetus is normal?) THe non disabled are looking for a special
> > protection status not the disabled.
> >
> > > However, Gregor Dick (sobsey) and Barb (waxman) and I have had heated
> > > debates about the "cost" of autonomy and independent, is it worth having
> > > the right to kill oneself if it means the abuse of that right in the form
> > > of murdering disabled people or pushing people to want to die.
> >
> > Now here are we at the ass. suicide debate. it sounds as if we are
> > against autonomy... That is not true. What Dick Barbara (I presume) and I
> > are saying that the right to die in a dignified way debate is not about
> > autonomy its not about the right to kill oneself in essence it's about
> > "after birth eugenics".
> > If
> > autonomy and independence and self determination would be indeed the
> > focuss of right to die than you would not just see disabled/people with an
> > illness targeted to allow THEM an access to a dignified death. Many other
> > people have no access to a dignified death but they are not part of that
> > push.
> >
> > The below is from Judy
> > > > > Democracy: you let people speak without muzzling and censorship, give
> > > > > them the options, engage in the struggle to make sure they're fair, but
> > > > > let the individual choose.
> > In order to do so you have also to level the playing field meaning that
> > both sides have equal options and effectivness to distribute their
> > thoughts. THat is not the case
>
>
Dr. Gregor Wolbring
Research Scientist at the
Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Faculty of Medicine
and Adjunct Assistant Professor
at the Dept. of Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies
Faculty of Education
both University of Calgary
Phone 1-403-220-5448
Fax 1-403-283-4740
eFax 1-603-761-3704
e-mail [log in to unmask]
webpage: http://www.thalidomide.ca/gwolbring
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|