The Use of Pre-natal Genetic Diagnosis

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

The likely secondary audiences are genetic counselors, possibly younger or older couples outside of the specified age range, and doctors used for referrals.

PGD was mainly designed to allow couples with the risk of passing on a dangerous genetic diseases to have children that wouldn't be affected by it. It’s been used since 1990 to prevent children from being born with Down’s syndrome, Tay-Sachs disease, cystic fibrosis, sickle cell, and Huntington’s disease. It is now being used to also create “savior siblings”, which are children who are able to donate bone marrow and other tissues to their sick older siblings (Genetic and Society). This goes against many religious views, one of them being Christian. Christians see it as “playing God” since God has created humans in his own image and to alter them would be implying that he is wrong. Catholics’ and Muslims both believe that embryonic research is the same as abortion and it is considered a sin for scientists to perform genetic engineering since it is as if they are trying to replace God (HubPages). This technology not only goes against many religious beliefs, but also goes against natural selection. As seen in My Sister’s Keeper, Anna is created through genetic selection and considered to be a “designer baby” which are babies who have specifically selected traits (Picoult 119). This demonstrates too much control because technology is now altering the way of life and it interferes with the natural processes. Even today, control is not only seen in technology, but in families. The question is, to what extent can a parent have control over their

Pre-implantation genetic diagnostic testing is a technique that is used to identify and prevent genetic defects in the embryos of mothers through in vitro fertilization before pregnancy. The term “designer babies” is what is used to describe the result of this procedure. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis can cause new issues to arise through society, morality and even science, thus this procedure should be prevented. As these certain issues of society, morality and science combine together, it can lead a negative ripple effect on humanity.

Another issue regarding DNA testing of embryos is the possible societal discrimination of disabled people, women, and familial discrimination based on child preference. Disabled people can be stigmatized in society. For example, people with conditions that are not life-threatening, such as Down's syndrome, can be categorized as unworthy of life. However, Gregor Wolbring, a bioethicist at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada replies, "If there was nothing wrong with Down's syndrome or disabilities, there would be no need for PGD" (qtd. in"Genetic Testing."). In addition, an eventual discrimination for women can occur in such countries as China and India, known through history for their preference for a male child. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis can denigrate the families’ integrity because parents may show more affection towards the children selected genetically than those

Regarding the subject of the use of IVF and PGD, or embryo screening of any kind, my stance is not a concrete one. I recognize the fact that while it is very possible for embryo screening to lead to discrimination of all kinds, it is also possible to potentially save many lives through early detection of treatable disorders, such as, hypercholesterolaemia. Therefore, I believe that the use of embryo screening technology should be used on a

Type of lifestyle, diet, and mindset are some examples of choices a person can make to better his/her life. Race, height, and genetic disorders are some characteristics that we cannot control. However, for genetic disorders, there are options to lessen the likelihood of having a child born with a disability. Taking prenatal vitamins, attending routine checkups, not drinking alcohol and not smoking are just a few proactive options that can help prevent an abnormal pregnancy. Another option to ensure a safe pregnancy is to have prenatal genetic tests (PGT) done. The use of PGT’s have spanked many controversies over the years simply due to individual's morals differing. Those who are not in favor of PGT’s believe that these tests can promote

Although PGD is a relatively new procedure, there are several ethical questions surrounding its use. One question is, "Should parents be allowed to choose characteristics for their children that are not related to disorders such as their baby’s eye color, personality, or even the sex of their baby?" [Wekesser,1996]. Until the genes responsible for inherited traits such as the previously mentioned are mapped, this is not an issue. If scientists do not know where the gene is located, they are unable to create a test determining the presence of the gene. However, because we do know how the sex of a child is determined, a specific gender can be screened for. Many believe that this should

Critics argue that permitting the creation of savior siblings through PGD is the first step down a slippery slope that ends with frivolous reasons for selecting an embryo over another. The procedure would open the door for parents to decide on specific characteristics of their babies. This is the creation of fully-fledged ‘designer babies’. As in the words of Josephine Quintavalle , “the new technique is a dangerous first step towards allowing parents to use embryo testing to choose other characteristics of the baby, such as eye color and sex”. For this reason, the creation of savior sibling is ethically impermissible since if one supports savior sibling, it is impossible to not support the permissibility of designer babies.

As per the Mirriam- Webster Dictionary a dilemma is “an argument presenting two or more equally conclusive alternatives against an opponent.” Two main sets of ethical objections make PGD and proposals for its extension controversial. One set of objections arises from the need to create and then select embryos on chromosomal or genetic grounds, with the deselected embryos then are usually discarded. Other objections concern the fact of selection itself. People who think that the embryo or fetus is a person will object to creating and destroying embryos, and oppose most uses of PGD. Others believe that pre-implantation embryos are too rudimentary in development to have rights. Under this view PGD is ethically acceptable when done for good reasons, such as preventing offspring with serious genetic disease. Indeed, PGD may prevent selective abortions for those diseases. A second set of objections arises from the fact of selection itself, and the risks of greatly expanded future selection of embryos and children. Dr Leon Kass has articulated this view and has argued that human reproduction is a ‘gift’ and

Some parents see prenatal testing as a way to appease their anxiety, knowing that their child will not have major birth defects. Others wish to be better prepared for what is to come, knowing that their child will be born with a defect. Still, others will be faced with the tough decision to terminate the pregnancy if birth defects are detected in the screening. The issue of aborting a pregnancy due to the detection of birth defects has been a source of major ethical controversy and debate (Ashford, & LeCroy,

acceptable? Should it be publicly funded? Is it acceptable to select embryos? Is it fair to discard unwanted embryos? There are government guidelines for the use of PGD in New Zealand. Clinics that offer PGD have to be approved by the Government’s Ethics Committee on Assisted Reproductive Technology. Some PGD uses require approval on a case by case basis. Some uses of PGD are banned eg. Sex selection or genetically altering embryos (‘designer babies’). This technology is also not allowed to be used to select for embryos with a particular genetic impairment. For example, if a parent wanted their child to have the same genetic condition as them. Ethics approval is not needed for single gene, sex-linked and chromosomal disorders but it is required for tissue typing. It cannot be used for sex selection because of social reasons. There are ethical objections which make the extension of PGD controversial. One objection arises around the need to create and select embryos, with the deselected embryos usually discarded, while other objections concern the selection itself. There are many people who are against the use of PGD due to their view of the embryo or fetus as a person and will object destroying embryos. Using PGD for preventing genetic diseases can be seen as a benefit to many people. The differing viewpoints of this topic explain why the use of PGD is a socio-scientific issue.

Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) can be considered a socio-scientific issue. A socio-scientific issue is a controversial social issue in relation to science. They can be ill-structured and open-ended problems, which have multiple solutions. 3 Many moral and ethical issues have arisen with the creation of the PGD

One of the biggest ethical arguments against gene editing is that it is unnatural, unsafe and “amounts to playing god” (“Pro and Con: Should Gene Editing,” 2016). I feel that for as long as humans have been living on this earth, we have been reproducing without any knowledge of what deformations, diseases, other life-threatening illnesses or even the eye and hair color that one could be born with. Until recently there has been no way that embryos could be screened for parents to know what complications they might encounter after the birth of their child. Today, the use of a technology called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) used in in vitro fertilization

This process has provided a practical alternative to prenatal diagnosis and the termination of pregnancy for people who could potentially transmit a genetic disorder onto their offspring. Even though no authentic engineering is being done through the process of PGD and what genuinely transpires is single cells are abstracted from embryos utilizing the same process that is used in In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). Then the cells are examined to identify which cells are carrying a sequence of DNA that will cause a genetic disorder to form. Afterward, the embryos containing a genetic disorder will be discarded, leaving only the embryos that do not contain a genetic disorder to be returned to the uterus. PGD can only work on previously identified genetic disorders. Which means that if parents are worried about their unborn child inheriting a disease or disorder, they can opt to have the embryos check for a specific disease or disorder (Braude Peter et al., 1-3). PGD could lower the percentage of infants that are born with a genetic