Harriet McBryde Johnson details in her story her meeting and eventual debate with Professor Peter Singer, who believes that disabled infants are not people and thus it should be legal for parents to kill their disabled child. Johnson, who is notably known for being a disability rights activist, who has congenital neuromuscular disease and occupies a motorized wheelchair, debated Singer and others with similar beliefs, and gave a full account of her meetings, emails and debate with Singer.  

One thing that I think captured my discomfort with this reading was when Johnson explained, “We should not make disabled lives subject of debate”(Johnson 11). I agree with her here, there is something sort of disturbing seeing in an academic setting the blatant disregard for empathy and emotion in some of these arguments. The urge for Singer’s perspective to become completely devoid of emotion and human contact – an impossible feat. As if distancing itself from compassion and delving solely into “facts” (which doesn’t equate to truth but that’s an entirely different discussion to be had) reveals an objective truth that defies the boundaries of morality altogether in its purity. YUCK! This seems to mostly come from nondisabled people in this story, where the distance between a person and “them” (being disabled people) is distinct, it seems to make the argument easier for them to have. The author here is much more patient here than I am, but I’m young and impressionable and quick to judge. It’s hard to appreciate the nuance that I know is there in these arguments when the topic of debate is — once again, like so many other seemingly pointless debates —  on who deserves to live and who deserves to die.

I must say however, that I am absolutely in love with this author’s voice. I can’t quite put my finger on why; maybe it’s because she’s a lawyer, maybe because she’s disabled, maybe because this is her story and she’s told it a hundred times over, but I really want to read more of her work after reading this! I love how she included so many details about the complexity of this situation, the people she’s aligned herself with and opposes, the debate and the trip she took to get there, every part of it is so captivating. I in particular love how she introduced Singer as, “The man who wants me dead”(Johnson 3). This sort of concise language is really refreshing, and her voice is so soothing and easy for me to read.