What Is Wrong With Genetic Testing

Within healthcare, practitioners often have to make difficult decisions regarding the care of their patients. This could be to do with giving or withdrawing treatment, or as simple as sharing risk information (Glover, 1997). Ultimately, the practitioner must be able to rationalise any decision they have made (Morrison, 2009). With this in mind, the following assignment will draw upon an ethical dilemma and explore how theoretical perspectives can be utilised within the decision making process. Therefore it will also be pertinent to draw upon the law, and how this influences actions within health care. To facilitate this discussion, I will identify a scenario from practice that

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”

The view over genetic testing starts with establishing necessary definitions and discussing its purpose in our world. To start off, the human body is a complex multicellular system. Every cell in the body is comprised of the same DNA (with some exceptions), which stores our genes. These genes are the set of instructions that encode the proteins necessary to create and maintain the human body. The issue is that some genes can undergo a variety of mutations during development that cause an array of complications or disease. Gene therapy can modify the designated abnormal genes to reach normalcy, while genetic engineering focuses on enhancement and surpassing what is normal. However, the goal of genetic testing is to identify the abnormalities

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.

   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

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

The two cases show that, although the doctors using different ethical approach, they may end up making the same

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

Research shows that the average person can have hundreds of errors in their genetic code. Though these errors tend to leave the individual unharmed, many still suffer the consequences of faulty genes. Some of these consequences can be mild, such as color blindness. Other disorders, however, can cause extreme suffering for those affected. Genetic disorders such as Hemophilia, Progeria, Cystic Fibrosis, etc. cause a lifetime of misery for hundreds of thousands of people around the world. I want to be a part of the movement that not only improves the lives of those with genetic disorders but also works towards eliminating genetic disorders as a whole.

When I think about the things that have been brought up on the ethical point of view in a test tube, and genetic testing, I honestly do not see it to be as immoral or unethical, these developments have improved and history. The possibilities of how technology and science can make a difference and help people. I think if it puts harm to others that when the question of her.

The majority of the conservative along with some liberals would not agree with the idea of this sort of scientific exploration due to its controversial undertone. A number of political figures feel as though some lines should not be crossed and although those in science feel the need to explore new avenues, should not try to play God. Is it to ethical to conduct this sort of testing and do people have the right to determine whether a child should be born based on their possible defects are some of the questions that cannot be answered by science. Science is different from other disciplines because it requires

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

In the world that we live in today, genetic engineering plays a key role in the agricultural field. Without genetic modifications, it would be pretty easy to say where the crop industry along with farm raised animals would be today if it weren’t for the use of Science. Human beings are in the same category. If it wasn’t for genetics, it’s hard to say where the human race would be at today due to the spread of rapid immune bacteria and viruses that roam the world. The use of genetic engineering is a very good and positive tool that has been used over the years, but do some Scientists and researchers want to take it too far?

I think the reason among that is because not everyone wants to know if they are going to be diagnosed with an illness. It will lead to a lifetime of stressors/anxiety throughout their life. Some may even feel guilty, for example, a positive genetic testing will lead to an increase in anxiety and guilty for potentially passing that illness down to their children. Also, getting a negative genetic testing may ruin family relations with guilt as well. Say, a brother an sister both had a genetic test done and only one came out to be positive. The other sibling will feel guilty for not having to worry about getting an illness while the other sibling is still at

Whereas Julian Savulesco, an ethicist, “says that people should be free to choose their children’s traits.” He suggests that the couple should be given all the correct information to help them make the right decision. So they should be given all the accurate test results so they can decide which child will have the best life possible. His main argument is that the couples are the ones entitled to the decision of which embryo to select. Whether they want a child without any genetic disorder or whether they do, it’s their choice. Whereas, a physician, Samuel D. Hensley, “condemns foetal genetic testing … and PGD … on ethical and religious grounds.” He believes that selecting against embryos without genetic disease completely ignores the unborn child. Hensley takes a more religious stance in comparison to the 0ther viewpoints and he believe that PGD and all forms of genetic testing is “playing God.”