Getting Honest about Abortion and Disability in Bioethics—Narratives of Identity-Based Retributory Suffering and Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud.

This article critically examines traditional bioethical approaches to abortion and disability, arguing that these classical frameworks—centered on personhood, rights, and obligations—are inadequate in the wake of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling and the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights how nonideal bioethics, which attends to real-world sociopolitical complexities, reveals a shared underlying narrative of "identity-based retributory suffering," wherein individuals are seen as deserving harm because of their identities as people who seek abortions or as disabled persons. The article documents how abortion restrictions post-Dobbs have led to increased unsafe abortions and systemic harms, while pandemic responses have exacerbated ableist and eugenic attitudes that devalue disabled lives. It concludes by advocating for bioethics to embrace narrative repair—centering counternarratives from affected communities—to more honestly address and ameliorate these harms rather than perpetuate outdated, harmful discourses.