Testing Women, Testing the Fetus
Rayna Rapp is an anthropology professor at New York University specializing in gender and health, health and culture, and science and technology. Rapp published her book, Testing Women, Testing the Fetus in 1999 in order to explore the social impact and cultural meaning of prenatal diagnoses. Amniocentesis and prenatal diagnostic technologies are used to determine the health of fetuses. These tests can detect any birth defects or health issues such as chromosomal anomalies and neural tube problems that may affect the baby. Because these tests take place during the second trimester or before, mothers are given the choice to terminate the baby if there are serious health issues. After the screening of her own child and receiving the diagnosis of Down Syndrome, Rapp chose to terminate her baby. As a result, she began to interview women who shared a similar story to her in hopes of bringing more awareness to the discourse.
Because of her fieldwork in anthropology, Rapp uses standard anthropological methods and feminist activism to explore and assess the matter. She credits participant observation for its open-endedness because it allowed her to enlarge upon her own research questions and become more educated as she met and interviewed individuals. Throughout her book, Rapp explores overlapping aspects of amniocentesis and prenatal diagnostic technologies and hopes to make a contribution to the technological transformation of pregnancy, the practical intersection of disability rights and reproductive rights, and the role of scientific literacy in the late 20th century.
The Unexpected Baby
Rapp’s book holds a number of interviews and recollections from women’s experiences that are heart-wrenching. However, the comments from the chapter “The Unexpected Baby” stuck with me the most. The comments from doctors that delivered babies with down syndrome were very cruel to me. Rapp includes the comment, “My doctor was so angry with me. He couldn’t believe I didn’t take that test. ‘How could you let this happen?’ he yelled at me (317). The doctor’s reaction is kind of frightening and he appears to have too much power to feel that entitled and yell at his patient. It is almost as if he believes he has the solution to this ‘problem’. His comment reminds of how advanced reproductive technology is often compared to “Playing God”. Perhaps there is too much power that comes with this technology that we are not mature enough to handle.
The Burden of Knowledge
Similar to the novel Testing Women, Testing the Fetus the film The Burden of Knowledge explores the experiences of women who choose to undergo prenatal testing. The film underlines 3 reasons why women explore prenatal testing: as a method of prevention, preparation, and to provide reassurance to mothers. The film is presented in chronological order, initially explaining the different types of testing available to mothers and ending with the birth and life of children who are born with down syndrome. There are a number of families that are interviewed throughout the film who do not all share similar values. For instance, one family believed that the more knowledge the parents are given the better judgment they will have when making a decision. However, another interviewee believed that this advanced technology is interfering with God’s work and society is not mature enough to handle it.
After watching the film a multitude of questions began to fill my head. Today, there is a stigma that surrounds individuals who are born with down syndrome and other birth defects. Some parents even viewed having a child with a birth defect as a burden on them, so this causes me to wonder are these prenatal tests being used selfishly by parents? Is society manipulating technology to eradicate individuals who are born with these disorders? The biggest question I had after watching this film and reading Rapp’s novel was whether or not the technology is being taken advantage of. It became difficult to weigh the benefits and negatives of amniocentesis and prenatal testing because both sides of the argument became convincing to me.
Conclusion
All in all, I find the arguments that support each side of prenatal tests and amniocentesis to be very compelling. However, the decision to take the test and what a mother chooses to do with the information is completely up to her. As long as there is no pressure from a doctor who is conducting the test, then I do not believe that a doctor is interfering with nature or “playing God”. Some benefits such as prevention (treatment during pregnancy) and preparation can help parents become better prepared if a child is diagnosed with a birth defect. Raising a child with down syndrome or another disorder may be more difficult for some families more than others in terms of financial costs, taking off work, and other factors. Depending on one’s situation, a mother may even choose to not terminate her child. Ultimately, I believe the decision is unique for each family and should not be compared to one another.
I specifically enjoyed your discussion of the film. The film left a big impression on me in terms of questions, as it did with you. I’m very anxious and interested to see how the culture around prenatal testing changes as abortion rights are limited throughout the Southern states. As women’s access to abortion shrinks and choices are limited, will women and couples still want to be tested?
I think that one aspect I hope we can discuss in class is how these ethics effect physicians. I agree with you that every situation is very circumstantial and broad legislation tends to overlook the specifics where most pregnancies are not comparable to each other; however, I wonder for all of the people who want to be doctors later on how do they feel if they were the ‘hand’ that terminated the pregnancy. Would that affect their ethics? How do OB/GYNs cope with this dilemma whilst also giving unbiased help to their patients?
For one, I would like to thank Nahire for her well-written blog that discussed nicely the implications of amniocentesis. I particularly enjoyed the expression of her concern regarding the abuse of technology. Perhaps this is true, but what could that mean for its further development? Would this hinder its progression, or motivate it? How differently would this technology be perceived if marketed as a way to “eradicate the disabled”?
Additionally, I write this as a reply because I am also profoundly interested in how physicians compute these kinds of ethical dilemmas. How do they cope? Do they feel obliged to simply follow rules (desires of patients) and stay objective? Does this, in turn, corrupt their own [the physician’s] personal moral codes? These are all interesting topics that I would enjoy discussing.
I enjoyed reading this blog, especially Nahire’s mentioning of birth defects and whether amniocentesis should be viewed through the same lens as receiving an abortion for other reasons, which are controversial. I hope we can further discuss this in class.
I appreciate your post. I have similar concerns regarding the use of technology to decide what lives are worth living. While I generally subscribe to the belief that health choices are personal and I try to refrain from judgement regarding personal health choices, this issue does give me pause when considering the possible long term implications. We as an American society have been very critical over other countries and cultures approaches to what they may view as “disabilities”, but we are less interested in turning that reflection back on ourselves.
I enjoyed how you established a connection between the reading and the film through the lens of technology. I disagree with your interpretation of the doctor’s comments in “The Unexpected Baby” chapter. In my opinion, the doctor was frustrated in trying to understand why a patient would not try to seek any benefit from advanced medical technology. As that related to your conclusion, I think it is wrong to assume that an OBGYN is attempting to “Play God” and that human nature’s abuse of technology is much more nuanced than peer pressure alone.
I really enjoyed your post, and I agree with your statement, “As long as there is no pressure from a doctor who is conducting the test, then I do not believe that a doctor is interfering with nature or “playing God”.” However, this sentence made me question whether ignorance could be bliss in some instances of abortion. As Rayna Rapp mentions, some clinics give pressure to pregnant women to get an abortion if the fetus is tested to be abnormal. Vice versa happens to. But the fact that these doctors conducting tests have the legal right to express their opinion on another women’s abortion is controversial.