Narrative Of Research Experience: Genetic Testing And Screening

   The Human Genome Project is the largest scientific endeavor undertaken since the Manhattan Project, and, as with the Manhattan Project, the completion of the Human Genome Project has brought to surface many moral and ethical issues concerning the use of the knowledge gained from the project. Although genetic tests for certain diseases have been available for 15 years (Ridley, 1999), the completion of the Human Genome Project will certainly lead to an exponential increase in the number of genetic tests available. Therefore, before genetic testing becomes a routine part of a visit to a doctor's office, the two main questions at the heart of the controversy surrounding genetic testing must be

False positive prenatal testing results lead to hundreds of thousands of abortions each year; even when the baby is healthy. Lastly the society often presumes that people with genetic disorders could not get a job and fulfill their lives, however from Waterloo’s 10 year research; it is clear that they could get a job and graduate from high school and fulfill their lives just like everybody else. It is time for the society to stop performing prenatal testing. Further, change and accept people with genetic disorders, because all humans are born

Many people have a negative outlook on prenatal genetic testing but that is because they are not educated on the goals

As you can see genetic testing is very important and can affect a child's and parents lives for the better and the worst. Children all over the world have serious genetic diseases that affect their life on a daily. Some of these diseases are Achondroplasia, Down syndrome, and Turner's syndrome. Many believe genetic testing is a good way to test for these genetic conditions before the child is even born, but others think that it can harm the baby very badly and even cause a miscarriage, so they choose not to do this kind of testing. Knowing about the most serious genetic diseases is very important for expecting parents to be informed as well as being

In chapter four of her book Genetic Dilemmas, Dena Davis asserts that it is unethical for parents to subject their children to genetic testing for the markers of adult-onset genetic diseases because it places an unfair constraint on a child’s right to an open future. It both removes the child’s ability to choose whether to be tested as an adult and has the potential to negatively alter the overall trajectory of their lives. While the current consensus amongst medical professionals is that such testing should be prohibited (Davis, _____), many concerned parents correctly point out that discouraging such testing creates a conflict of interests between the “beneficence model of patient care and the rights of parents to their own autonomy”

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.

Savulescu would argue that Policy A is the best since it best aligns with the idea of procreative beneficence. Policy A makes genetic testing a routine procedure and suggests meeting with genetic counsellor after the testing if the test indicates that the child might have a disability. Since Policy A makes genetic testing a part of the standard routine, it becomes a norm. Thus, parent(s) refusing to do the testing

Genetic testing, or a referral to a genetic counselor, is the standard of routine OBGYN care for women with an increased lifetime risk. As the Pap Smear has screening guidelines and indications, genetic testing must also adhere carefully to evidence-based recommendations. Providers should not endure referral bias. Rather, they should follow the recommendations brought forth by ACOG. Shared decision-making should be used; however, it is the responsibility of the healthcare provider to deliver the education on screening guidelines. Even if the patient declines, she will walk out of the exam room with awareness. During a large qualitative study done in 2015, awareness

With the advances made in genetic testing and the lowering cost of testing, conversations surrounding the ethical considerations of genetic screening in newborns as well as adults is becoming more and more commonplace. One such commentary is made by Pollack (2010) in his article on genetic screening in newborns, who cautions against both the monetary and emotional cost of genetic screening. The following paragraphs will offer a summary of Pollack’s (2010) article, as well as a critique of the article in which this author will agree that genetic testing comes at potentially great cost and should be carefully considered.

In the case of Martin, Martin could possibly use PGS to select for an aggressive gene to be in the embryo if such a gene is possible to achieve with the parental cross. In selecting for a specific trait, Martin has changed the course of genetic screening from selecting against a disease to selecting for a personality. This brings forth larger ethical issues which will be discussed later on a larger scale (Lázaro-Muñoz). Additionally, PGC and in vitro fertilization costs are substantial when all lab fees are considered with an average of 15,000-17,000 dollars in America (Sherbahn). This cost is substantial, causing any who do not view screening as necessary to avoid it. Insurance is also currently avoiding supporting the costs of PGS and in vitro fertilization due to the nature of the procedure being viewed as experimental or not required (Haney). There are, however, some states which require group packages to include in vitro fertilization coverage which encompasses PGS (Haney). With the cost and lack of insurance coverage, PGS screening is unavailable to all people in society. If put into large/common practice to remove genetic disorders or select for behavioral traits, PGS would result in discrimination between the financial gap where those who can have protected/selected children will and those who cannot will do without (Harper). This discrimination, as a result of being health based, could result in more social separations and injustices as the privileged will have access to a health advantage others will not have

For example, some suggest that genetic engineering does not include superficially changing genes to what a parent may see as a more desirable trait for their offspring such as fair skin or green eyes. As stated in the Columbia Law Review, one of the world’s leading publications of legal knowledge,“Of clinics that offer Preimplantation genetic diagnosis, forty two percent have used the technology to allow couples to choose the sex of the child, twenty four percent have used it to select an embryo that is an immunological match with an existing sick child, and three percent have used it to select for a disability common to the parent, like deafness or dwarfism”. From this quote, it is evident that those who have the opportunity to modify their offspring’s genes do not do so in an attempt to get rid of life threatening diseases and illnesses, but rather for their personal

provide an early treatment that would permit a person to live longer and more meaningful and

2. Is it right to use genetic screening as a tool to keep tabs on their prospective enrollees?

Frasers article discusses that, “those who test for genetic disabilities sends a message that devalues people who already have disabilities, and views prenatal diagnosis simply as a way to avoid the distress of having a child with a serious disorder” (Fraser). He makes a great point that it already affects those whom have the disability and degrades them as an experiment that could have been prevented (Fraser). Those with disabilities are humans too, who require a little more attention and guidance. It’s

“A genetic test can reveal that a person who is otherwise healthy has a higher risk at some point in the future of being unable to work, or requiring extensive medical care, or otherwise being more predisposed to an adverse state of health” (Ahwaz Chagani & Philippe Michaud). Such personal information regarding someone’s health can in turn affect their employment and insurance policies. Genetic testing has its advantages and disadvantages towards the insurance industry and its stakeholders. It greatly affects the insurance industry as they are not allowed to know about one’s genetic information as the Genetic Non-Discrimination Act prohibits that. The impact on stakeholders is that it is advantageous to policyholders and in turn disadvantageous to shareholders and brokers and agents.