Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Defending the impairment argument
  1. Bruce Philip Blackshaw
  1. Philosophy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  1. Correspondence to Bruce Philip Blackshaw, Philosophy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2SQ, UK; bblackshaw{at}


Kyle van Oosterum and Emma Curran have recently argued that the impairment argument against abortion is weak and accomplishes little. They also claim that impairment fails to explain what makes giving a child fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) immoral, which is an important premise of the argument. Here, I explain that the impairment argument is not as weak as they believe. Further, I argue that impairment offers a superior explanation for what makes giving a child FAS immoral than their proposal based on creative beneficence.

  • Abortion - Induced
  • Fetus
  • Future child disability
  • Personhood

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles

  • Original research
    Kyle van Oosterum Emma J Curran

Other content recommended for you