Saviour Siblings
As science becomes ever more sophisticated in the coming years, it is becoming harder and harder to determine what is ethically right and wrong. One particular, quite recent event is the “saviour siblings” controversy. Saviour siblings, according to the Cambridge English Dictionary, is “a child who is born with particular genes that have been chosen in order to treat an older brother or sister who has a disease.” This particular topic of discussion was started by the author, Jodi Picoult, who wrote “My Sister’s Keeper”. It is a story about a young girl, born to be her older sister’s saviour sibling, seeking medical emancipation. This book explores the ethics of being a saviour sibling, highlighting the fact that saviour siblings
…show more content…
Saviour children, are not children born from natural means; it requires a certain medical process called In Vitro Fertilisation, or IVF. According to the Mayo Clinic IVF is “a complex series of procedures used to treat fertility or genetic problem and assist with the conception of a child”. First, mature eggs from a woman’s ovaries, and fertilised by partner’s or donor’s sperm in a lab. Then, after the egg is fertilised, the embryo is implanted in the woman’s uterus. Since the saviour sibling must be free of any disease and must a perfect match for the sick sibling, IVF is preferred as it is the safest form of artificial conception. However, the process itself is a major problem, since many feel as if choosing “better” genes artificially is ethically wrong, as parents can choose what genes their child will and will not have. In addition, during the the IVF procedure, surplus embryos are created in order to increase the chance of a successful pregnancy. As a result, the surplus embryos are frozen or killed off. Many who say that human life begins at the moment of conception believe that these is an outrageous act of cruelty, and must be stopped at once. However, despite all of these arguments and controversy around the IVF procedure, it has been deemed the safest procedure for both the saviour sibling and the sick …show more content…
The Nash’s family had a six-year old daughter suffering from a fatal disorder of Fanconi anaemia, resulting in rapidly progressive bone marrow failure. Her only chance of survival was having another sibling with suitable tissue match. Her parents went through a legal battle in order to gain permission to have IVF to transplant a suitable embryo, and they won. After four failed pregnancies, the Nash’s family had a healthy baby boy Adam, free from Fanconi anaemia and a perfect tissue match for his sister. After a transplant of stem cells from Adam’s placental and umbilical cord blood stem cells was made to his sister, she has shown to have made some recovery after three years. While this situation is certainly one to be celebrated, one distinct question that stands out is the saviour sibling’s
Over the years, medical researchers have violated some of their individual rights. However, the results from the famous study of Henrietta Lacks has provided for significant advancements in medical research. In hindsight, it makes sense to choose to save one hundred people while sacrificing only one individual for the sake of the greater good. In the novel, Dawn by Octavia Butler, and an article written about Henrietta Lacks by Jessica L. Stump, correlations become evident between choosing the greater good over the individual. the choice to let an individual suffer somatically is acceptable when the sake of the greater good is in question.
Recent high profile cases, films and books all around the world including the UK, Australia and the United States have brought to the public’s attention a new type of IVF. ‘Embryo Selection’ meaning ‘Embryos are fertilised outside the body and only those with certain genes are selected and implanted in the womb.’ Henceforth meaning that doctors are now able to select specific embryo’s and implant them into the mother of who may have another sick child in order to gain genetic material such as bone marrow which will match the ill-fated child and therefore hopefully be able to save their life. Creating a ‘saviour sibling’. ‘A child conceived through selective in vitro fertilization as a potential source of donor organs or cells for an existing brother or sister with a life-threatening medical condition’ a definition given by Oxford Dictionaries (1.0). Cases of this are happening all around the globe and many are highly documented about. The most famous case could be noted as in the fictional book of ‘My Sisters Keeper’ By Jodi Picoult. I will further discuss this throughout my dissertation and how books and films can affect the view on certain ethical subjects. Furthermore, I am also going to discuss a range of factors such as certain religious beliefs and the physical creation of saviour siblings compared to the creation of designer babies. Strong views are held by many both for and against the creation of saviour siblings.
Couples experiencing infertility issues now have a number of options at their disposal from in-vitro fertilization to intrauterine insemination or going as far as using a surrogate and donor eggs or donor sperm. Technology has made it possible for someone to experience the joy of parenthood regardless of whether they can naturally conceive children. All of these procedures come with their own ethical questions and pros and cons. One of the biggest moral dilemmas is what to do with the left-over embryos still in storage when a family has decided they have had enough children. Most couples see this ethical quandary because they recognize that the embryos are whole human beings and do not think it is morally right to dispose
One of the most heated political battles in the United States in recent years has been over the morality of embryonic stem cell research. The embryonic stem cell debate has polarized the country into those who argue that such research holds promises of ending a great deal of human suffering and others who condemn such research as involving the abortion of a potential human life. If any answer to the ethical debate surrounding this particular aspect of stem cell research exists, it is a hazy one at best. The question facing many scientists and policymakers involved in embryonic stem cell research is, which is more valuable – the life of a human suffering from a potentially fatal illness or injury, or the life of human at one week of development? While many argue that embryonic stem cell research holds the potential of developing cures for a number of illnesses that affect many individuals, such research is performed at the cost of destroying a life and should therefore not be pursued.
With the increased rate of integrating In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), there has been a steep inclination within the associated needs of specifications. Observably, the development of babies using scientific measures was initially formulated and specified for developing the diverse range of development associated with the same (Turriziani, 2014). However, these developments are noted to be creating an adverse impact on the natural course of events and subsequently, resulting with an adverse impact on the natural process of the development of babies. The initial integrations within the system of IVF for developing babies have further been initiated with the effective use of science to develop a healthy baby. Hence, the use of such progressions can be argued as not hampering the ethical needs associated with the same. Conversely, the initial progression within the same and the changes in the use of such practices are identified as unethical, as it has been acting as a threat in the natural course of development of embryos and altering the natural course of events, suspected to be imposing significant influence on infant mortality (Turriziani,
For just thousands of dollars more, women going through in vitro fertilization can later choose to have a certain gender with perfect vision, a great heart, a natural ability for sports, and being able to avoid diseases (Angelle). Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis was first inaugurated in 1990. “It has become an important complement to the presently available approaches for prevention of genetic disorders and an established clinical option in reproductive medicine” (Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis). This has come in handy because it gives you the opportunity to create a baby free of health risks and you are able to freeze your eggs if you miscarry or if something harmful goes wrong with the first egg. Designer babies are created using In Vitro Fertilization. Using this technique, doctors can fertilize the egg with sperm inside the laboratory using a test tube. Doing so you can reduce the chance of the child being born with a genetic disorder and the parents can actually then on choose the sex of the baby. In some cases couples have used PGD to their advantage to save one of their children. Some babies sole purpose is to be created to save the life of their own sibling. Jamie was the first “designer” baby in Britain. “He was genetically matched to his four-year-old brother, Charlie, in the hope to curing a rare type of anaemia which threatens the older boy...
I believe that parents are not morally justified in having a child merely to provide life saving medical treatment to another child or family member, but that this does not mean that the creation of savior siblings is morally impermissible. By having a child solely to provide life saving medical treatment, you are treating this child merely as a means rather than an end to the individual child. By having the child solely as a means to save another, you are violating this savior sibling in that you are treating them as a source of spare parts that can be used by the sickly child in order to solely promote the prolonged life of the currently sick child. This view that having a child merely as a way to provide medical treatment does not consider the multitude of other avenues that this newborn child can take, and presupposes that the child will only be used for the single purpose of providing life saving medical treatment through use of stems cells or organ donation. What this view fails to consider is that these savior siblings are valued by families for so much more than just as a human bag of good cells and organs that can be used to save the life of the original child. Instead, these savior siblings can be valued as normal children themselves, in that they can be valued in the same way that any other child who is born is valued, yet at the same time they will also be able to provide life-saving treatment to their sibling. My view runs parallel to the view held by Claudia Mills who argues that it is acceptable to have a savior sibling, yet at the same time we can not have a child for purely instrumental motives, and instead should more so value the child for the intrinsic worth that they have. Mills presents her argument by puttin...
Imagine yourself in a society in which individuals with virtually incurable diseases could gain the essential organs and tissues that perfectly match those that are defected through the use of individual human reproductive cloning. In a perfect world, this could be seen as an ideal and effective solution to curing stifling biomedical diseases and a scarcity of available organs for donation. However, this approach in itself contains many bioethical flaws and even broader social implications of how we could potentially view human clones and integrate them into society. Throughout the focus of this paper, I will argue that the implementation of human reproductive cloning into healthcare practices would produce adverse effects upon family dynamic and society due to its negative ethical ramifications. Perhaps the most significant conception of family stems from a religious conception of assisted reproductive technologies and cloning and their impact on family dynamics with regard to its “unnatural” approach to procreation. Furthermore, the broader question of the ethical repercussions of human reproductive cloning calls to mind interesting ways in which we could potentially perceive and define individualism, what it means to be human and the right to reproduction, equality and self-creation in relation to our perception of family.
The addition of a child into a family’s home is a happy occasion. Unfortunately, some families are unable to have a child due to unforeseen problems, and they must pursue other means than natural pregnancy. Some couples adopt and other couples follow a different path; they utilize in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood. The process is complicated, unreliable, but ultimately can give the parents the gift of a child they otherwise could not have had. At the same time, as the process becomes more and more advanced and scientists are able to predict the outcome of the technique, the choice of what child is born is placed in the hands of the parents. Instead of waiting to see if the child had the mother’s eyes, the father’s hair or Grandma’s heart problem, the parents and doctors can select the best eggs and the best sperm to create the perfect child. Many see the rise of in vitro fertilization as the second coming of the Eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. A process that is able to bring joy to so many parents is also seen as deciding who is able to reproduce and what child is worthy of birthing.
There is very much controversy surrounding the case of the very popular Henrietta Lacks. One of the major implications on the situation that people have a problem with is the lack of consent obtained by Johns Hopkins University and the doctors involved. All though it was not common place as it is in today’s society, many feel that it was not ethical to perform medical procedures without the patient and their family being given all of the knowledge regarding the situation. The tissue sample taken by doctor Howard W. Jones was unbeknown to the family which violates the ethical respect for the person that should be held. A sample of someone’s DNA is not anything that should be taken lightly or regarded as unimportant. It should have been a decision made by Henrietta, and had she of known of the procedure she may have voted against donating to research. This lack of incorporating Henrietta and her family caused there to be a dismal amount of respect for persons shown by the University and all
This report will outline the ethics of conceiving a child for the purpose of using cells, tissues or even organs to treat an existing child with a fatal disease. In outlining the ethics of saviour siblings, the question of whether it is ethical to conceive a child for the purpose of becoming a saviour will be explored.
The nature- nurture debate has many different case studies, which often questions environmental and hereditary aspects of the nature- nurture debate. A tangent which is focused on in this essay is how the case studies of schizophrenia and IQ, specifically affect twin and adoption studies. This essay will firstly, give a brief outline of the nature-nurture debate and the definitions of twin and adoption studies. Secondly, it will illustrate two main case studies, which are IQ and Schizophrenia studies. Thirdly, will contrast and compare the two and research’s impact on the case studies in regards to nature vs. nurture and finally, will conclude with the impact of the nature-nurture debate and twin and adoption studies.
Parker, Michael. "The Best Possible Child." Journal of Medical Ethics 33.5 (2007): 279-283. Web. 1 Apr 2011. .
On the contemporary moral issue of savior siblings, addressing the concept of human dignity can be quite gray. This is primarily because the savior sibling is conceived through the use of the Therapeutic reproductive technology. Therapeutic reproductive technology ensures that the child is a suitable match for the sick siblings. This is so that the savior sibling is able to donate blood, bone marrow and other live saving cells and organs (like a kidney) to the sick sibling.
As a young adult, it may seem foolish to predict what your future family life will look like, especially in regards to children. Often times this reality is forced upon a select few, particularly homosexual couples; however, with the innovation of in vitro fertilization (IVF), a couple is met with promise and the hope of a successful family life. IVF can be described as a process by which a fetus is genetically formed in a laboratory setting. Though this process may seem unnatural in essence, it allows for a more diverse family arrangement through medical innovation. This procedure, though controversial, is seen by many as an advancement in the medical field and can be accredited to procuring a healthy child for an unfortunate family, whether