Argumentative +/- Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis

Another big benefit of testing is the ability to know in advance the health of a baby. It is no longer necessary for parents to be to have to worry about the health of their child. The technology is there to know in advance. Some people have major health problems in their family. This testing could make it possible for them to give birth to healthy long living children. The whole point of prenatal genetic testing is to improve life through good health. There are enough things

A Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a test that “allows future parents to detect genetic defects that cause inherited disease in human embryos before they are implanted.” One of the most ethical questions that one might ask before considering the PGD is whether the benefits of genetic knowledge outweigh harmful effects that occur to the embryo? Is it really worth manipulating embryos genes in order to achieve the desire of the parents? Often times we have to take into considerations the risk and benefits of each situation. I believe that the PGD test should be only be done to detect genetic defects, but it should not be used to manipulate genes in order to make what to them is a “perfect” child. As stated in our text, “ In the united Kingdom alteration of an embryos genes, even for gene therapy or cloning embryos is illegal.” By manipulating genes its like going against Gods wishes. In the eyes of God every person that comes into this world is equally seen as a human being because they are all created in “ the image of God.” In this case the parents should not be allowed to manipulate the genes of their unborn child just to accommodate to their

In the article “Selecting the Perfect Baby: The Ethics of “Embryo Design,” is an article about a married couple, name Larry and June Shannon. They have a daughter, four years old, name Sally, who is diagnosed with Fanconi Anemia. Therefore, the Shannons are getting help from a research team, to find the perfect bone marrow transplant for Sally. The Shannon couple is also interested in having another child and they are aware of the risks and odds of success. However, a PGD process has to be performed and the couple must undergo an IVF procedure more than once, before the implantation is successful, to be able to produce a healthy full-term baby.

PGD is known as pre-implantation genetic diagnosing. I do not think it is ethical to design and conceive a child that meets specific genetic requirements. I do not feel that this is an ethical reason to conceive a child. Rather, I believe all children should be seen as blessings or gifts, not sacrificial genetic progeny.

Derek Parfit in “Energy Policy and the Further Future” presents the dilemma of whether or not there is a moral difference between allowing thousands of children to be born with an illness and later cured, or rather never allowing these same children to be born and instead have a “different child” come out of the child bearing process with their health fully intact. In the case in which funding can only be attributed to one of these circumstances, I would support the situation in which doctors performed Preconception Testing. I feel as though this is the most morally acceptable answer because it would prevent a human life from having to endure an unnecessary handicap. Regardless of the fact that children in the first example would eventually

During IVF, the egg is typically fertilized in a lab before being implanted into the uterus. Before transferring the embryo into the uterus, some fertility clinics offer patients the option of choosing what sex embryo they want. Although IVF is more commonly used for families struggling with infertility rather than for the sole purpose of sex selection, sex selection is still an option. This seems both futuristic and controversial but Codington-Lacerte argues that prenatal sex selection methods allow parents to make informed choices about the makeup of their families (Codington-Lacerte, “Point: Sex Selection”). This type of eugenics is seemingly harmless because in choosing a sex for their child, parents aren’t really damaging society.

Medical professionals today can screen for certain genetic traits (genetic diseases and sex) with in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis to obtain a healthy child, and reproductive technology continues to improve. With this in mind, the question arises whether sex selection is ethical. Julian Savulescu, Uehiro Professor of Practical Ethics at Oxford University, argues that sex selection is moral, based on his ethical principle of Procreative Beneficence: that “couples (or single reproducers) should select the child, of the possible children they could have, who is expected to have the best life, or at least as good a life as the others, based on the relevant, available information” [Savulescu 1]. Savulescu claims

Over the course of the semester the topic I felt that I analyzed and reflected upon most was sex selection. Sex selection is a topic that I knew very little about at the beginning of this semester, but I have come to learn a lot about and appreciate over these past few weeks. Sex selection refers to numerous methods that allow one to select the desired sex of their embryo. Technologies that include ultrasounds or prenatal testing followed by selective abortion, preimplantation genetic selection (PGS) for sex, as well as numerous sperm-sorting methods, are readily available for families that yearn for a particular sex of their unborn child. I have considered both sides of the argument against and in favor of sex selection, but my view is sincerely against sex selection.

According to “Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: Ethical or not?” Janet Malek, a bioethicist at the Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University, states in quote “... people who carry a gene like GSS have a moral duty to use preimplantation diagnosis -- if they can afford it -- to spare the next generation.” end quote. Going by what she says and the high price of about $20,000, which means if you aren't extremely wealthy you won’t be able to afford this, so most of the population wouldn’t be able to afford this service. Which means it is only accessible to a select few, therefore making it less effective. Another and the final problem with this system is brought to light by David Wasserman, a ethicist at Yeshiva University and consultant, said in quote “there is no obligation to use it for diseases that do not start until adulthood. Eliminating embryos with such genes is essentially saying someone like Ms. Kalinsky should never have been born.” end quote. As true and controversial as Wasserman stated he speaks the truth. Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis should be reserved for either heavily crippling or life threatening diseases. Reasoning is if an adult contracts a disease such as GSS and then does have money to pay for a Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis procidure then should be allowed to get the operation, but for people who want to ensure the sex of their kid should find something else to spend their money

Prenatal genetic testing has become one of the largest and most influencial advances in clinical genetics today. "Of the over 4000 genetic traits which have been distinguished to date, more than 300 are identifiable via prenatal genetic testing" (Morris, 1993). Every year, thousands of couples are subjecting their lives to the results of prenatal tests. For some, the information may be a sigh of relief, for others a tear of terror. The psychological effects following a prenatal test can be devastating, leaving the woman with a decision which will affect the rest of her life.

It is important for a well educated person to have thorough understanding of advanced methods of prenatal testing because they could possibly have to consider using this type of testing in their future. If there is a circumstance where one of the parents carries a gene for mental or physically illness, they may need to undergo one of this procedures. However, it is vital to know all the pros and cons before actually participating in one of these procedures. Without the knowledge, one may not be aware that they can actually test for an illness that runs in their family. If one decides to undergo one of the procedures, they give themselves a chance to figure out what exactly they want to do with the child and can prepare themselves to support the child once it enters the world. However, depending on the illness, couples can decide to abort. It is also critical to know the risk of miscarriage connected to both procedures.

Consequently, people with different cultures will have different views on gender selection. However, the biological components of the human race are the same. PGD is a technology that can be used on the human race. Therefore, PGD should be a technology that is open to anyone who is willing to use it but at the same time, there should be strict regulations on it to ensure that the universal moral code is maintained. Likewise, King argued that PGD most be strictly regulated, and that “we attempt to find some consensus about where to draw the lines around the application of PGD. (CITE)” The consequences of allowing PGD, even if it is strictly regulated, should be addressed. Many predictable consequences include full blown consumer eugenics, changes in the parent and child relationships, changes on a human being’s self perception, and many more. Thus, allowing PGD for gender selection may possibly be a gateway for a new type of culture, a culture of a different type of parent to child relationships and self-perception. Yet, this culture should be maintained so that it follows the universal moral code. The universal moral code should be a set of standards agreed upon and decided by majority of the cultures that exists

Using preimplantation gender selection is a well-known practice in the twenty-first century to select the sex of a child, but the ethical issues behind it raise many questions to the public. As stated in the “A Question of Gender: Sex Selection in Humans” essay, there are many ambivalent arguments for and against the use of the preimplantation gender selection (PGS). As stated in the essay, selecting the sex of a child to reduce health problems (X-linked diseases) and also reduce the family’s suffering in the future, such as, hemophilia or Duchenne muscular dystrophy. I would be able to understand and be able to appreciate parents’ decision to select the sex of their children only if it is due to medical issues, in my opinion there is no exception to that.

With new technologies available everyday, it seems almost as if we can customize our children. Reproduction is no longer an outcome of random and inherited genes, but now it’s a process of creating the child that we want to have. Fertility clinics are in debate as to whether or not it is ethical to be able to determine the sex of our children. Some view this as a valid option, while others see it as another step down the road to designer babies. But how far is too far? That is a question that we can only answer for ourselves. While this article remains unbiased, we are able to form our own opinion after seeing the pros and cons of both sides.

In the United States, an estimated 2.3 million couples are considered infertile [Wekesser, 1996]. This creates a large need for infertility specialists and clinics specializing in fertility treatments. With the quickly advancing field of rep roductive services and the quest for creating better, healthier babies, a new service called Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is being offered in conjunction with In vitro fertilization.