Unspeakable Conversations

“Unspeakable Conversations” by Harriet McBryde Johnson is truly an amazing piece. This account was written with such heart and strength; I couldn’t help but feel like I was fighting against pro-euthanasia with her. Johnson’s description of her daily activities, like eating, going to the bathroom, and using her wheelchair, provided a better understanding of the difficulties disabled people face every day. Although she struggled, she never let her disability affect her quality of life. In fact, she thought, that it allowed her to see things and experience things in a much different way. Almost, as if, she was more appreciative and grateful than the average person.




Prof. Peter Singer, although controversial, seems to have a way with words that Johnson takes a liking to. Though she does not support his philosophy, she understands some of his work. What’s difficult for most to comprehend is that although Singer’s philosophy basically states that Johnson should’ve been killed as a child, his reasoning isn’t entirely off from what a portion of society thinks and feels towards disabled people. Some believe that life for disabled people isn’t worth the money, care, and emotional stress. They are blinded so much by the actual disability that they fail to realize that disabled people are people too, who live, laugh, love, accomplish, and succeed.



In the end, Johnson has a conversation with her sister about her previous engagements with Singer. Confused and rather defensive, her sister Beth tries to figure out why she chose to handle herself the way she did. When Beth mentioned that Singer was advocating genocide and that she fears what will happen if he convinces people that his philosophy is correct, Johnson states that his talk won’t matter in the end. (101) Johnson then states that Singer “doesn’t propose killing anyone who prefers to live.” (101) Beth replies by saying, “So what if that view wins out, but you can’t break disability prejudice? What if you wind up in a world where the disabled person’s ‘irrational’ preference to live must yield to society’s ‘rational’ interest in reducing the incidence of disability? Doesn’t horror kick in somewhere? Maybe as you watch the door close behind whoever has wheeled you into the gas chamber? (101) Johnson, knowing very well that this has happened before, is left with nothing but a practical need for definitions that she can live with, knowing that belief and hope would not do much justice.



Johnson’s conversation with her sister Beth was rather overwhelming. Just the thought that at some point a society’s view on disabled people could lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people forcibly without consent is shocking.