Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T09:52:34.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

At Home with Down Syndrome and Gender

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Sophia Isako Wong
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I argue that there is an important analogy between sex selection and selective abortion of fetuses diagnosed with Down syndrome. There are surprising parallels between the social construction of Down syndrome as a disability and the deeply entrenched institutionalization of sexual difference in many societies. Prevailing concepts of gender and mental retardation exert a powerful influence in constructing the sexual identities and life plans of people with Down syndrome, and also affect their families' lives.1

Type
Feminism and Disability II
Information
Hypatia , Volume 17 , Issue 3: Special Issue: Feminism and Disability, Part 2 , Summer 2002 , pp. 89 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hannah, Arendt. 1960. Vita activa, oder, vom tätigen Leben. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
Adrienne, Asch. 1989. Reproductive technology and disability. In Reproductive laws for the 1990s, ed. Cohen, Sherill and Taub, Nadine. Clifton, N.J.: Humana Press.Google Scholar
Bernard, Jessie Shirley. 1974. The future of motherhood. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Bérubé, Michael. 1996. Life as we know it: A father, a family, and an exceptional child. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Bickenbach, Jerome E. 2000. The ADA v. the Canadian charter of rights. In Americans with disabilities: Exploring implications of the law for individuals and institutions. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Botkin, Jeffrey R. 1995. Fetal privacy and confidentiality. Hastings Center Report 25(5): 32–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buchanan, Allen, Brock, Dan W., Daniels, Norman, and Wikler, Daniel. 2000. From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chris, Burke. 1991. A special kind of hero. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Judith, Butler. 1990. Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sujeet, Desai. 2002. Personal Web page. Retrieved 8 January 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.sujeet.web.com/.Google Scholar
Frederick, Douglass. 1982. The claims of the Negro ethnologically considered. In The Frederick Douglass papers, ed. Blassingame, J.W. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kittay, Eva Feder. 1998. Love's labor: Essays on women, equality, and dependence. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jason, Kingsley, and Levitz, Mitchell. 1994. Count us in: Growing up with Down syndrome. New York: Harcourt Brace & Co.Google Scholar
Lakin, K. Charlie, Bruininks, Robert H., and Larson, Sheryl A. 1992. The changing face of residential services. Mental retardation in the year 2000, ed. Rowitz, Louis. New York: Springer‐Verlag.Google Scholar
Marta, Little, and Leshtz, David. 1995. Planning for health care in adulthood. In Medical and surgical care for children with Down syndrome, ed. Van Dyke, D.C., Mattheis, Philip, Eberly, Susan Schoon, and Williams, Janet. Bethesda: Woodbine House.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1973. The subjection of women. In The feminist papers, ed. Rossi, Alice S.New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Martha, Minow. 1990. Making all the difference: Inclusion, exclusion, and American law. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
National Down Syndrome Society. 2002. About Down Syndrome. Retrieved 8 January 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ndss.org/aboutds/aboutds.html.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1989. Justice, gender and the family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Rayna, Rapp. 1999. Testing women, testing the fetus. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, Tom, Gillespie‐Sells, Kath, and Davies, Dominic. 1996. The sexual politics of disability: Untold desires. New York: Cassell.Google Scholar
Anita, Silvers. 1998. Disability. In Blackwell's companion to feminist philosophy, ed. Jaggar, Alison and Young, Iris Marion. Maiden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Peter, Singer. 1993. Practical ethics. 2d ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Streissguth, A. P., Barr, H. M., Sampson, P. D., Darby, B. L., and Martin, D. C. 1989. IQ at age 4 in relation to maternal alcohol use and smoking during pregnancy. Developmental Psychology 25(1): 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trent, James W. J. 1994. Inventing the feeble mind: A history of mental retardation in the United States. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Weinberg, Joanna K. 1988. Autonomy as a different voice: Women, disabilities, and decisions. In Women with disabilities: Essays in psychology, culture and politics, ed. Asch, Adrienne and Fine, Michelle. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Wertz, Dorothy C. 2000. Drawing lines: Notes for policymakers. In Prenatal testing and disability rights, ed. Parens, Erik and Asch, Adrienne. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Leo, Wong. March 26, 2000. Letter to Columbia University. (Personal correspondence on file with author.).Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar