  In sum, theorists who argue for the permissibility of using reprogenetic technologies and practices for disease and non-disease traits seek to preserve parental reproductive autonomy and to expand rather than reduce parental options. At the same time, they emphasize the need to increase the future child’s options, so long as doing so does not reinforce unjust social prejudices or threaten deeply held core values. One problem with this thesis, to be explored more in depth below in the section on critiques, is the appropriate scope of its central claims. Some critics (e.g., Asch 2000; Saxton 2000; Sparrow 2005), for instance, suggest that it fails to recognize that many of the presumptions about social prejudice could be extended to prejudice against people with certain diseases and disabilities, many of whom live relatively well with traits or characteristics that genetic enhancers may well desire to eliminate or attempt to improve upon. If we ought not collude with and exacerbate the social prejudices of sexism and racism through our reproductive genetic choices, why is doing the same for ableist norms permissible?