Apparently if the other posts in this thread are to be believed then western man and eastern woman is not the pairing most likely to cause problems. I guess there could also be a PC element at work where a doctor would be loath to bring up the subject. But even were it true it would not be a moral issue, just a biological one. How this would affect cultures and behaviors would be interesting.
As one aspect I would wonder for instance how the Catholic Church would feel about how much intervention should be provided to try the bring the child to term. Would it be OK to have no intervention and allow the baby to come to term or not come to term naturally or would they be required to do everything possible to save it? I can see a moral distinction in my mind between this and abortion but effectively it is maybe the difference between benign neglect and actively doing harm to the fetus.
If this effect were more pronounced could it have kept the Mongol hordes from dominating the West had they continued to advance? Lots of fodder for alt histories here.
Well, it may slightly increase risk - for something that they test everyone for anyway. Why bother to point out the change in risk if you’re going to test for it no matter who it is?
Actually, most doctors don’t even bother testing anyone for Rh incompatibility anymore. All Rh- mothers are treated with Rhogam. Doesn’t even matter what Dad’s blood type is, as Dad might not be Genetic Dad of this fetus (first rule of medicine: patients lie. Pregnant patients lie just as much as other patients.)
I suppose if the fetal (or umbilical) blood was tested for something else, you could ask your doctor to test it for Rh factor while he was at it, but most of us don’t get our fetus’ blood tested.