I've heard that Cuba in particular has way more abortions than other countries because it helps keep their child-mortality rate down.

Even without the race connotations, eugenics still scare the hell out of people. First, because of the "first step" syndrome ("today, Duchenne, tomorrow, brown eyes or flat feet ?"). Second, because they've seen that Gattaca film (and if you haven't, you should). Eugenics is one of those things that suck even more for those who haven't had any of it.

P.S. And once we get government backed health care in the USA I'm pretty sure that the element of coercion will come into play (perhaps we'll call it "incentives for terminative preventative care" or something).

Care to back that up with real data from Western countries with state-sponsored health care? I'm not aware that we have any of that in France or in the UK.

I'll bet that parts of France and the UK see abortions for lack-of-Y-chromosome disorder.

Care to back that up with real data from Western countries with state-sponsored health care? I'm not aware that we have any of that in France or in the UK.

well, genetic testing isn't that widespread yet, so of course this isn't necessary due to socialized medicine. but anyway, i found stuff like this.

and just to be clear, i don't think anyone will be forced to abort. but, i do think some care may be withheld if the parents knew that the child was going to be born with a disease which would result in a 6 month life expectancy and maximal treatment could increase life 3 or 4 months. it just seems that the cost of testing (our information) will go down far faster than our ability to cure or treat every ailment under the sky. basically i'm making a malthusian argument (though over the short term).

Hypothetically, do you see government sponsored healthcare go down that path for the United States?(if one can herd the cats into accepting such a plan, another discussion for another day).

I wouldn't be surprised to see private companies offer such incentives first, in order to be more effective. Basically, a good student/driver type discount offered by the insurance companies.

Personally, I'm a little cautious that any public sponsored healthcare system in the USA would go down the path of "incentives for terminative preventative care", considering the friction against embryonic stem cell research.

I wouldn't be surprised to see private companies offer such incentives first, in order to be more effective. Basically, a good student/driver type discount offered by the insurance companies.

i think public outcry would prevent this sort of thing. insurance companies are already detested and distrusted, they don't have gov. fiat behind them nor the patina of a public consensus. e.g., some states ban use of credit scores to det. auto insurance rates because of disparate racial effects. that seems small potatoes to me compared to health care.