ABSTRACT

The nonidentity problem is accepted by many philosophers as demonstrating that choices can be morally wrong even though they are not bad for, and do not make things worse for, that is, harm, or disrespects, existing or future people. Members of distant future generations perhaps would have had better lives had they not had to struggle for clean air and water. But the odds against those very same identical people coming into existence had things been otherwise than exactly as they were seem enormous. In genetic cases, the burdened child really does seem to owe his or her very existence to the couple's choice not to screen against the disorder. The choice to produce the burdened child is the best agents can do on behalf of that child and as good as any alternative for any other existing and future person. It's also a choice made with acceptable attitudes and intentions toward all potentially affected parties.