I am not defending the position of the French court. My concern is where the logic of your argument leads you. As long as the social model of disability, as you call it, is presented as the only, or the overriding, claim, without respect for women's reproductive freedom, I see it as leading to a position for restricting that freedom. Even if what you say about France were true, and I do not know if it is, it is not the only country in the world. Pro-life forces in countries where reproductive freedom is at risk make precisely the same argument you are making. We need to recognize that there is more than one legitimate claim in this situation.
My reply: The logic of your argument does not truly account for the social relations which cause women to abort any and all disabled fetus. You act as though women's freedom to choose is void of prejudice, stereotypical notions of impairment, and not the product of a "normalizing" society. The knee jerk aborting of disabled fetus is aligned with an ideology of "normality." Nor does your argument take into account the medical profession's complicity in the decisions that women make about fetus with impairments. The medical institution (abortion is a part of) is just as socially oppressive towards disabled persons as any other social institution - employment, housing, transportation, etc. "Freedom" must come with a materialist consciousness otherwise it is just as oppressive as anything else. -- Marta Russell