Genetic Testing Is Ethical Essay

“Members of the disability community have expressed dismay that others may think their lives are not worth living.”(Thomas et al., 2015, p.17). Prenatal screenings give the parent the opportunity to discover if their child may have a disability, which could lead to the avoidance of parenting a child that is disabled (Thomas et al., 2015, p.17). Many people do argue that the decisions made from test results are in fact not a problem. Those same people tend to argue that it depends on a person’s morals and is not a way to try to decrease the amount of disabled children (Thomas et al., 2015,

The first section will focus on parents with a family history of severe hereditary diseases such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell anemia. When one or both partners in a couple are carriers of the genetic mutation that could leave could lead to a serious medical condition in the child, IVF and PGD screening can be performed on their embryos1. These parents will choose to screen their child to see if the genes related to the hereditary disease are present in the embryo. They are also checking to see if genes that don’t guarantee the disease but have a strong correlation are present as well. This is done to prevent the onset of that disease for their child.

This method can possibly allow humans to pick and choose the “best genes”, apart from medical considerations, for an infant, as if they are creating an ideal computer character. Many worry that parents will select traits for their infants, engineering their child to be a super human. The ethical issue is that many people have genes that stray far from the ones categorized as the “best” genes. In turn, it can imply that those who lack these are unfit and unfavorable to the society’s standards. People will seek to fix their “abnormal” genes by enhancing or exchanging them with preferred ones, questioning the ethical validity of the DNA process. Despite the positive changes that it may bring, it takes the human race further back from the progression and indirectly promotes discrimination and stereotyping against many groups of people.

In a recent article in the New York Times, it mentions that gene and DNA alterations is being perfected sooner than we thought. We are getting so close to perfecting this that “a group of leading biologists called for a worldwide moratorium on the use of a new genome-editing technique that would alter human DNA in a way that can be inherited”. Theses scientist do not think this modification is ethical. George Q. Daley, a stem cell expert says “this raises the most fundamental of issues about how we are going to view our humanity in the future and whether we are going to take the dramatic step of modifying our own germline and in a sense take control of our genetic destiny” Volti talks about how some people would take gene alternation to the next level. Genetics is “taken to the extreme, expanding knowledge about genetics holds out the promise-or the threat-of what the eminent biologist Edward O. Wilson has called “volitional evolution”, that is, directing human’s heredity to favor some traits while extinguishing others” (Volti, 59).

Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a method used to screen for genetic abnormalities and genetic defects in embryos, that were created through invitro fertilization (IVF). “IVF is the process of fertilization by extracting eggs, retrieving a sperm sample, and then manually combining an egg and sperm in a laboratory dish”. By using PGD, families with a risk of having a child with a serious genetic disorder can screen the embryo prior to implantation, to identify if the child presents genetic defects that can cause certain diseases or disorders. These genetic diseases or disorders occur due to one of more parents carrying the genetic abnormality. Screening can include counting chromosomes and/or a examination of molecules for a specific mutation or aneuploidy. PGD is a socio-scientific issue, due to the decision on whether to terminate the embryo if

Now, if I was asked the question, “Would you get a genetic test?” I would reply, “why not?” Genetic testing may have some ethical questions to be asked for sure but getting the test will tell me if I have the chance of a healthy future and if not what I can do the prevent or help the situation. Yes there may be other ways to look at it for example, If their was nothing the doctors could do and there were no treatments or even understanding for my situation. It will give me a better look at myself and help me enjoy life so much more. To me it just depends how you look at something and decide whether or not to make something good come out of it.

Prenatal genetic testing has come a long way from the 1930s, it has gone from only having one test capable of detecting only a couple genetic disorders/disease, to now being able to detect just about any genetic disorder/disease, and it is still progressing into the future. In the 20th century, there for only four to five techniques used, however most of these techniques were not completely accurate, but into the 21st century we saw a few new techniques added along with the older ones becoming more accurate in order to plan for a termination or for the future of the fetus. Scientists have been adding to these techniques every day, finding new markers for small changes in the genome and connecting those to genetic disorders that could develop

After the embryos are selected, PGD is used to find the perfect embryo that has not inherited the genetic disorder which is implanted in the uterus of the mother. Although it is an effective method of treatment, there are many issues currently raised about this technique. The biggest issue is the destruction of embryos that are not selected to be implanted because human embryos are the very first stage of human life and should deserve the same treatment as any other humans. Another huge issue is whether the child’s value in the family will be equal as the child was conceived for a specific reason instead of natural conception. Despite the persisting issues, there are pros and cons regarding the creation of savior siblings. The main pro is the ability to treat previously untreatable genetic disorders. On the contrary, the cons include instrumentalizing human beings, and the possibility of psychological issues in the household. Overall, the cons far outweigh the pros as it feeds the issue of instrumentalizing human beings and leads to psychological problems which can be directly prevented by prioritizing research of savior embryos

Ethics are going to interfere in sciences due to future developments in genetic engineering. As the research in the field of transgenics continues with plants and bacteria, the same isn’t true with animals. Recently, the discovery of genomics has opened a door where the common sense and the ethics have blocked: The possibility of creating modified humans. A professor of practical ethics at the University of Oxford, Savulescu (2014) states that humans “have a moral obligation” to improve themselves, and since genetic engineering are serving for this purpose, the humanity shall not avoid this. However, the ethics behind this seems more complicated than it is, because, besides the fact that for now this is scientific fiction, the science is getting closer to a reality, and it breaks the common sense of creating a new life. Consequently, changes ought to be done to those genetic modifications happen.

Preserving the physician-patient relationship is one of the key issues as to why health care providers should have extensive knowledge in genomics. Respect for autonomy is key; this includes giving the patient enough information to make their own decisions based on accurate information on genomic testing (whether they should have the test, as well as how to manage the results afterwards). From a survey of 137 physicians at a Cleveland, Ohio Clinic (about half were primary care specialists) 84% of the physicians agreed that new findings in genetics were changing clinical practices in their respective areas of expertise, 39% reported being familiar with up to date research in genetics, and only 36% said that their current genetic knowledge was appropriate to answer their patients questions. (Sharp et al, 2011).

Being able to modify appearance is only a mere example of what could potentially occur in the near future. As of now, the only thing you can choose about your baby is if it's a boy or a girl. But after this becomes old news, it won't be enough for scientists and parents. People are greedy. If they want something they will stop at no cost to achieve their goal. Opening this door of “opportunity” will lead to a very bad place. This is a “for-profit industry”, meaning that eventually it will be run on greed if it isn't already.

They feel that prospective parents should have the right to use existing embryo screening tests to determine all possible characteristics of offspring. Unless a tangible harm to specific individuals can be evidenced, those of this belief argue that selection of offspring traits is a liberty all parents should have (Harris 185). George Annas, chairman of the Health Law Department at the Boston University School of Public Health, writes from this viewpoint, “Prenatal tests become a consumer product, and as with other consumer products it should be up to the individual whether or not to buy the product, and physicians and companies should be free to advertise and sell the product in any misleading way” (Annas 265). Annas fears that such an attitude will make parents more likely to perceive their children as products rather than people. Another likely harm may be that prenatal testing will only be a feasible option for the wealthy. If the likelihood of genetic disease in the wealthy decreases and other citizens do not have access to PGD, will genetic disease perhaps be associated only with the economically unprivileged? Others may argue that parents already try to shape their children in certain ways, and adding the genetic dimension to their influence would not be very different. For example, Robertson writes: “Parents now have wide discretion to enhance offspring traits after birth with actions that range from the purely social and educative, such as special tutors and training camps, to the physio-medico…such actions may give the child advantages over other children, exacerbate class and socioeconomic differences, and risk treating the child like a product or object to serve the parent’s interests. Yet they fall within a parent’s discretion in rearing offspring, and could not constitutionally be banned” (Robertson 164). PGD is perfectly permissible in terms of law,

I’m currently a molecular biology major, and so far out of all the science courses I have taken I loved genetics the most. I always had a fascination in genetics because the science of heredity is so complex and based largely off of probability. A recent technology that has been created in this field is called CRISPR, which is a gene editing technique that allows unfavorable pieces of genomic DNA to be cut out. This is a controversial topic, as some people are against the idea of having scientists determine which genes to eliminate and which genes to go through to the following generations. On the other hand, others are in favor of this new technology in the hopes of lowering the frequency of inherited diseases such as Huntington’s and muscular dystrophy. The technique itself sounds simple in that DNA cutting proteins can be inserted into the cell’s nucleus where the DNA is located, target the specific sequence responsible for the undesirable genes expressed, cut it out and either ligate the DNA back together or put in complementary bases that offer a beneficial effect. However, genetics is not that simple. As I’ve learned from class, a specific phenotype is not only affected by one gene. Phenotypes can be affected by

to have unborn fetuses tested for genetic abnormalities people can know before a baby is born

Long, blond hair, bright, blue eyes, genuine personality, athletic strengths, and intellectual brains: a flawless counterpart for any child being raised in today’s society.  It’s a matter of time before the enhancement of human evolution is available to the world.  Currently the question doesn’t begin with if but instead portrays the matter of when will genetic engineering be ready to manipulate the human nature.  Genetic engineering, which includes the deliberate modification of human characteristics in a specific organism, causes controversy between people with difference in opinion (U.S.).  Genetic engineering for the aspiration of designer babies is not right, however utility for medical reasons of a fetus