I think that everybody should do a genetic test at a very early age in order to know what is going on with their genes. Even if a genetic test is positive, a genetic counselor, doctor, or other health care professional trained in genetics can help an individual or family understand their test results. These professionals can also help explain the incidental findings that a test may yield, such as a genetic risk factor for a disease that is unrelated to the reason for administering the test, so they can clarify the implications of test results for other family members. Doing a genetic test is crucial because on an expanded panel, certain cancer can be entirely reversed with an early intervention like dietary
It is patients’ right to opt for genetic testing on their own DNA, although they are accepting a great risk by doing so.
Prenatal testing includes screening and diagnostic testing that can provide valuable information to parents about the baby’s health. “Women are routinely offered a variety of genetic screening tests during their first three months of pregnancy to evaluate the risk for genetic disorders in their unborn baby” (livescience.com). I believe prenatal testing and counseling should not be mandatory and that each person needs to make their own decision based on their specific circumstances. Many prenatal tests are noninvasive and only require blood or urine and can test for HIV, anemia, diabetes, hepatitis B and preeclampsia. An ultrasound can also be used to detect some abnormalities with the baby. Doctors may strongly recommend that women who
In Improvements in Prenatal Genetic Testing Raise Ethnic Issues, R. J. Crayton produced an article about prenatal testing and whether or not parents should be allowed to have these tests done. First the situation of a high risk baby who will have a disability or defect after birth, so the parents decide to abort the child is being viewed as an inequality to the disabled community. Secondly, certain adoptions are put on hold since the biological parents chose to not carry the unborn child through the entire pregnancy, however, the surrogate mother wants to carry the child through the entire term. Lastly, research shows that the results can be a false positive, so unintentionally the parents decide not to keep the unknown, but healthy baby.
Will this screening test be mandatory in the future or stay optional? People might become isolated and unwanted which could lead to depression and other medical illnesses. How will it effect society with people who do have recessive genes for these diseases ? Many people who have more than one recessive gene might feel as if they are social rejections and are unable to get married or have children. This could effect society severely and make people feel segregated. Should this be considered a national screening test given out to everyone ? Most importantly is this screening program a model of eugenics? Is there a possibility of improving life and the quality of human species by offering this screening test. These dilemmas raise many issues for the future and how it will affect society either positively or
The amount and scope of testing newborns is increasing as time goes on, should they be tested for other traits? Some traits that might be available to be tested for in is traits linked to alcoholism, heart problems, and how smart you can be when you are older. Baby's shouldn't be tested for these traits because it can worry the parents, it would set the child to a certain level they can't achieve or want to reach any higher but are told they can't, and also tell you how you are going to live you life by predicting/telling you traits of certain disease and personality traits.
Although the alternative would be using humans or dead human tissue as the test subjects, the critics believe that this is a better solution. Many large scale companies would not sacrifice the substantial amount of revenue it would cost to pay test subjects fair wages or compensate them for a test gone wrong. Companies would take advantage of poor low class citizens or illegal aliens to perform tests paying them low wages and not compensating for injuries sustained in tests performed. Also some companies might disregard safety testing completely jeopardizing the safety of families everywhere or even costing lives. The value of a human life is exponentially more than an
If the child the parents are getting tested is adopted, the rules should differ. When a child goes up for adoption, they should automatically get a genetic test for mutations in genes because they might not know the child's family history. If the place of adoption does not test the child, it should be a requirement to whoever adopts the kid to get it genetically tested before the parents can take the child home.
Many parents claim that they should have the right to have their children tested for any late-onset diseases if that child is at risk. The professional consensus of most medical professionals (Kopelman), do not agree and claim that testing children for late-onset diseases not only affects the child in a negative manner, but also negatively influences the parents’ relationship with that specific child (Davis). I argue that children at risk for late-onset disorders, such as Huntington’s or Alzheimer’s disease, should not be tested for such genetic markers at the request of their parents.
The testing is not a bad idea as such but it should not be done to children. This regards to personal autonomy where it would be better if the testing is delayed until an individual is old enough to make his or her own decision about the test. A person’s genetic information should be private and counselling should be done to elucidate the basis for and consequences of the test in question. Individuals should be allowed to choose when and which
Ethical issues for prenatal testing currently are on the rise. In most medical tests, there are always ethical issues that come with the progress. Prenatal screenings are still something that is fairly new to the world. Since there are many types of tests and advancements to the screenings, there are many ethical issues. Many of the ethical issues are the psychological and emotional effects, ethics concerning religion, if the tests are purely for information, and other ethical issues that are coming forward.
3. In my opinion, the greatest importance of this policy change is to ensure accuracy of test results. Although rare, people with a family history of an illness should be able to get tested
I think it is extremely interesting the newborn screening programs within the United States vary from state to state. In DC, newborns are screened for 52-55 genetic and metabolic disorders. In your state program screens for_______. The amount of test screened in not the only variation in the newborn screening programs. Informed consent, test result documentation, test results notification to parents or the healthcare provider vary as well from state to state. States screening “programs (45.1%) report only to physicians and require just their name (43.5%), an identification number (17.4%), a letter (26.1%), or a parent's signature (26.1%)… In 74.5% of programs, parents are notified but not asked for consent before collection of the sample; 19.6% neither notify parents nor obtain consent before screening” (Shlomit et al., 2002).
How would you feel if you knew exactly when your test was gonna be, weeks before you actually take it? If a student knew an estimate of when their test would be before they knew the whole chapter, they would most likely know when to study to get the best grade. I understand that teachers want students to study on their own, but if students are included in sports or activities, they would rather do that then study. When teachers give a test sooner than expected, students will stress out and wither forget to study or study during other classes. All students at OJGH should not have any tests on Mondays, Wednesdays, or Fridays.