That's a slippery slope. Who gets to decide who lives and who dies? Who should we abort or sterilize? We all suffer to some degree, then we all die. It's the human condition.
Doctors do all the time, they even have their own word for it: triage. When resources are insufficient to cover the needs of everybody, difficult decisions need to be made. Or as the case may be, easy decisions...
Is a decission reserved to parents, in this case. Triage is a term that aim to save the maximum number of people in disasters with many victims. Not to decide if somebody dies or lives.
People is classified in colors black, red, etc after its state. If you are in an accident and you cry and shout repeatedly you are classified in a lower priority than the quiet person that do not moves.
Between population growth not slowing anywhere near fast enough and rapid environment loss due to climate change, there is a good chance we'll see the mother of all triages. Not something to look forward to.
I thought this discussion was about prioritizing care to children that have a chance at a normal life (e.g. are not "a blind, deaf and mentally retarded baby with a chronic heart condition"), not killing the poor. My bad.
Yes, but it's an unavoidable slippery slope forced on us by nature, that we can affect with technology and that won't be going away until we can eliminate death and suffering. It's not a new slippery slope, doctors/parents/bureaucrats have to make decisions like this every day already and have for most of human history.
It's where we draw the lines on this slippery slope that constantly evolve.
Ultimately the parents should get to decide, but we should make all means necessary available to them to give them the option so select, or engineer, a healthy embryo.
Doctors do all the time, they even have their own word for it: triage. When resources are insufficient to cover the needs of everybody, difficult decisions need to be made. Or as the case may be, easy decisions...