by Mitch Kokai
Senior Political Analyst, John Locke Foundation
The Journal of Medical Ethics is one of the preeminent bioethics journals in the world. So, when an article appears in the publication that is subversive to human decency and basic morality, notice needs to be taken.
“Is pregnancy a disease?” the article’s title asks. Why yes, yes, it is, the authors answer.
First, they depict pregnancy as if the gestating baby were a tumor:
“Imagine a patient who visits the doctor having an abdominal mass that is increasing in size, causing pain, vomiting and displacement of other internal organs. Tests are booked, and investigations are planned. But when the patient mentions that she has missed her period, these alarming symptoms suddenly become trivial. She is pregnant!”
The authors don’t care that pregnancy is a normal part of life and necessary for the human race to continue. Rather, they compare being with child, as the old saying went, to contracting the measles:
“We can compare pregnancy with measles. Measles is uncontroversially regarded as a disease and treated as such by public health authorities and health professionals. Measles is harmful to nearly all of those who catch it. However, most patients will survive. Very few will die, and only a small proportion will go on to experience longer term impacts on their health. So how do the risks of pregnancy compare against those of measles?” …
… In other words, the developing child is the equivalent of a pathogen.
But isn’t pregnancy a normal part of human life? No! Because most people can’t get pregnant — i.e., males and females not of child-bearing age. …
… Furthering their thesis, the authors claim that childbirth is so traumatic, humans may one day go extinct. …
… The authors claim that treating pregnancy as a disease will be good for women because medical means to prevent — or terminate — pregnancy will be considered preventative treatment