Abstract
Individual freedom for a selective abortion based upon prenatal diagnosis continues to pose serious problems. In this paper I have considered this problem with regard to the allocations of medical and welfare resources. This led to the conclusion that regulations for prenatal testing must be established. Since the reduction in the birth ratio of people suffering from hereditary defects may also decrease the allocation of resources for genetic disease, we can no longer ignore the relationship of this problem on the economy. From this point of view, selective abortion can also be acknowledged as a public economic matter as well as an individual matter. The Pareto principle, a generally adopted criterion for effectiveness and justice of welfare in the field of economics, does not allow for a fluctuation of resources without compensation for the effected individuals. Since certain changes of the conditions contravening this principle may lead to market failures, this alone provides the government with rational grounds for establishing pertinent regulations with regard to prenatal testing. This also implies a contradiction of the double standard-the new eugenics never causes discrimination. In this study I regard the fetus and genes as virtual assets for prospective parents. Taking those hypothetical values into account, parents must decide whether to opt for a selective abortion. The market determines asset values of the fetus and genes without liquidity. This irregular structure can also lead to market failure. In addition, other significant factors for market failure include the asymmetry of information, uncertainty and the existence of public goods. As a tentative conclusion, I believe that taxation might be worthy of consideration as an appropriate regulation in order to prevent any undesirable disorder.
