In “Where Is the Sin in Synecdoche?” (2005) Adrienne Asch and David Wasserman criticize the choice to use prenatal testing (PNT) to determine disability. Notwithstanding the multiple meanings, motives, and circumstances behind people’s reproductive choices, Asch and Wasserman argue that individual choices to reject impaired potential offspring should be the subject of moral scrutiny, since they are likely to be the result of synecdoche—“the uncritical reliance on a stigma-driven inference from a single feature to a whole future life” (181). Such (...) synecdochal choices, they argue, assume that in virtue of impairment, the future child in question would be “incapable of [the] intimacy and community” involved in family.. (shrink)