Question

Naomi has a baby born prematurely. he is small but healthy. as he grows, naomi and the pediatrician realize that the baby cannot hear. after conducting tests, it is confirmed that naomi’s little son is deaf. she is then sent a letter from the government stating that under the law for the prevention of progeny with hereditary diseases, her little boy must be sterilized as soon as the pediatrician deems that it is safe. naomi understands the idea behind the law, but she wants to appeal. she believes that surely her son does not qualify. what is most likely her reasoning? forced sterilization is inhumane. her son’s disability is not genetic. her son is not of jewish descent. naomi does not believe that her son is deaf.

Answer 1

Naomi likely wants to appeal the sterilization order as she believes her son's deafness is not hereditary and such forceful measures are inhumane, violating human rights and ethical considerations.

Step-by-step explanation:

Naomi's reasoning for appealing the government's directive for her son's sterilization likely stems from her belief that her son's disability is not genetic. Historically, the eugenics movement sought to prevent the birth of individuals with disabilities by enforcing policies like the Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases, which could include forced sterilization. Such practices were part of a larger societal trend to institutionalize and limit the rights of those with disabilities. Naomi may believe that imposing sterilization on her deaf son is a violation of human rights and may not necessarily prevent the transmission of the disability, particularly if the deafness is not hereditary. Acknowledging the complexities surrounding the ethical issues in choosing genetic traits in offspring, Naomi's case illustrates the need to consider individual rights in the conversation about genetic health.