Genetic Testing
The technologies available to aid in diagnosing genetic diseases and disorders have developed extraordinarily over the years. As a result, one topic up for discussion is how the technology should be used in the realm of diagnosing children before birth, mainly, using it to selectively screen embryos for genetic diseases. Leon Kass is one author who opposes genetic testing. He provides two main reasons why he feels it is morally wrong to use genetic screening on unborn children. This paper will examine the main reasons Kass provides for his viewpoint, critically evaluate them, and show that Kass is correct in his first main point, while his second main point may have broad merit, but is incorrect in his detailed application.
There are several different techniques to conduct genetic testing. Leon Kass opposes the two primary methods. First, there is pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. In this method, an embryo that has been created in a laboratory, using an egg and sperm from the prospective parents, is screened for the genetic disease that the parents are concerned about. Any embryos that are revealed to either carry the gene, or actually be affected by the disease are rejected from the pool of acceptable embryos. The embryos that are free from the disease of concern are then available to be implanted into the mother. The second main technique involves an embryo that was conceived through natural means and is in utero. In that case, an amniocentesis is done to remove cells from the developing fetus. The cells are then screened for the genetic disease(s) of interest, and the parents then must choose how to proceed with the pregnancy, if the results indicate that their child will likely be affected.
Leon Kass has ...
... middle of paper ...
...s the biggest smile on my face. He really loves interacting with everyone.” Since she has made an emotional connection to the afflicted child, she now clearly groups the boy and the illness as two separate items. Henry may have Down’s syndrome, but in her mind, it no longer defines him. Kass makes the incorrect assumption that people won’t change their descriptions based on their contact or knowledge of the illness.
Overall, Leon Kass presents a strong and convincing argument against genetic testing. He provides several clear examples of how those suffering from genetic diseases are later selected against will suffer significant emotional distress, as well as social alienation. Although he puts too much emphasis on the way individuals phrase possession and identity, he is correct that it is common to group an affected individual and their illness together as one.
In Gattaca, the plot focuses on the ethics, the risks, and the emotional impact of genetic testing in the nearby future. The film was released in the 90s; yet in the present, the film does not give the impression of science fiction. Today, genetic testing is prevalent in many aspects of the scientific community. This paper will describe genetic testing, its purpose, diagnostic techniques that use genetic testing, relating Huntington’s disease to genetic testing, and the pros and cons of genetic testing.
The history of harmful eugenic practices, spurring from the Nazi implementations of discrimination towards biologically inferior people has given eugenics a negative stigma (1,Kitcher, 190). Genetic testing, as Kitcher sees it through a minimalistic perspective, should be restrained to aiding future children with extremely low qualities of life (2,Kitcher, 190). He believes that genetic engineering should only be used to avoid disease and illness serving the role of creating a healthier human race. He promotes laissez-faire eugenics, a “hands off” concept that corresponds to three components of eugenic practice, discrimination, coercion and division of traits. It holds the underlying works of genetic testing, accurate information, open access, and freedom of choice. Laissez-faire eugenics promises to enhance reproductive freedom preventing early child death due to genetic disease (3,Kitcher, 198). However there are dangers in Laissez-faire that Kitcher wants to avoid. The first is the historical tendency of population control, eugenics can go from avoiding suffering, to catering to a set of social values that will cause the practice of genetics to become prejudiced, insensitive and superficial. The second is that prenatal testing will become limited to the upper class, leaving the lower class with fewer options, creating biologically driven social barriers. Furthermore the decay of disability support systems due to prenatal testing can lead to an increased pressure to eliminate those unfit for society (4,Kitcher, 214).
In today’s advanced world, modern technology has enabled humans to accomplish tasks once thought to be purely science fiction. We live in a world today where everything is instant and custom designed. Who would have ever thought that one day parents would be able to design their children? Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a “process [that] involves taking a 3day old embryo and pulling one of its six cells to test for genetic markers of disease.” (Edmonds0. Although this process is meant to help discover harmful diseases or complications like cancer, the idea of parents using this process to give their children what they consider “ideal traits” co0mes into question. Even though parents have a right to do what they think is best for their children, parents should not be allowed to genetically engineer their children because it can create new social and economic distinctions as well as destroy the idea that everyone is created equal no matter their differences.
Testing of one kind or another has always been very common in the job application process, whether it’s the testing of one’s skill sets through an application or drug testing. Now, through scientific advances of the Human Genome Project, a new type of testing has become available to employers: genetic testing. This new sort of testing would detect any genetic problems in a potential employee’s DNA, including genetic predisposition for disease and possible health concerns in the future. Genetic testing could be beneficial to companies monetarily, as it would be a way to screen their employees for long term, damaging factors which could be expensive for the company. The legal right to do so, however, is a controversial issue in the business world. Many people regard it as an invasion of privacy, an open invitation for bias in hiring pools, and a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (French). Genetic testing could be used in both the hiring process, and as an attempt for companies to cater to their employees’ needs. It could also, however, be used as a tool of discrimination against those with minor or major genetic abnormalities. Many ethical issues are raised: does a person have a right to anonymity in their DNA? Should employers discriminate against those with genetic problems, a factor out of the subject’s control? These disputes and more are what make genetic testing in the workplace a contentious topic today. Unless an act, such as the Genetic Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance and Employment Act, is passed, discrimination will run rampant through the job market, injuring the modern employee in the process. Despite the quantity of information about employees that could be retriev...
Genetic testing is the testing of DNA in a patient’s blood in order to detect genetic disorders. This can be used to predict the disease risk of an embryo, an unborn infant, or a fully grown patient, including the individual’s risk of passing on a genetic disorder to offspring (National Institute of Health [NIH], 2013). To test adult patients, a blood sample is first taken from the patient and the DNA ...
Many things are changing at an extremely rapid rate in our society. The new advances in the areas of science and biotechnology are raising many ethical and moral dilemmas for everyone. No one will be left unaffected. Everyone will have to make a decision and take a stand on these issues. I will discuss advancements of genetic screening and testing. The first step to any ethical problem is to understand the topic. It is difficult to formulate accurate ideas without knowledge about the topic, so first I will provide a little background information on genetic screening. I will then point out some of the areas of controversy associated with genetic screening, and finally I will discuss my view on the topic.
One of these issues is the moral and ethical issue of genetic testing. Genetic testing is a controversial topic that affects patients, fetus to adult. For the sake of keeping this article from being too broad, I will focus on prenatal and fetal genetic testing. Proponents of genetic testing argue that it is a form of preventative medicine, allowing the parents to be prepared or make decisions about a child before the child is born. They may point out that with knowledge of defects or disabilities while child is in utero, medical staff can be ready to act immediately at birth to save the infants life. Place states that genetic testing gives prospective parents a choice in having a child with a disability or birth defect (as cited in Farrelly, et al., 2012). Malik points out that
"Prenatal genetic testing is checking for genetic disorders by looking for changes in a person's DNA" (Childress 519). Doctors take a small blood or tissue sample from a patient and they can test for genetic mutations that could possibly show up in their child. For testing for prenatal genetics, the doctor or mother wants to "determine if a fetus has genetic abnormalities likely to cause physical or mental impairments" (520 Vaughn ). If a mother is over the age of 35, the odds of her having a child with down syndrome is greater than a mother who is in her 20's. Genetic testing is also performed when there are inherited genetic disorders in the family history or ...
Prenatal tests show the possibility of a child having a genetic disorder, such as Down Syndrome which leads many parents to choose abortion. When it comes to prenatal testing there are many different testing options. Screening tests for example, which are the first tests that are done on the fetus. During the first ten to thirteen weeks of a pregnancy, a woman can get a first trimester screening done. This is an ultrasound and maternal blood test that tests for the genes of Down Syndrome and Trisomy 18. In a first trimester screening, a result of 1/50 means a woman has a 2% chance of having a baby with a chromosome disorder (The Facts on Prenatal Testing). The next testing window is the fifteenth – twentieth week of pregnancy. This is a Quad screening and consists of a maternal blood test the looks for Down Syndrome, Trisomy 1, and neural tube defects in the fetus. In this test there is a 5% false positive rate (The Facts on Prenatal Testing). Lastly, in the screening test options is the anatomy ultrasound, which is done eighteenth-twenty-second weeks into pregnancy. This screening is an ultrasound that assesses for birth defects. Screening tests are non-invasive and therefore leave very few negative impacts on the fetus. The majority of this paper will focus on the more invasive tests, such as diagnostic tests.
The desire to have a "normal" child is held by every parent and only now are we beginning to have the ability to select for that child. In preparation to receiving genetic testing, the parents are required to meet with a genetic counselor. A detailed description of the testing methods are reviewed with the couple as well as the risks which are involved with each. Upon an understanding of the procedures, the counselor discusses the many possible outcomes which could be the result of the diagnosis. Finally, before any tests are performed, anxieties from either of the parents are addressed as well as the psychological well-being of the parents.
In today’s world, people are learning a great deal in the rapidly growing and developing fields of science and technology. Almost each day, an individual can see or hear about new discoveries and advances in these fields of study. One science that is rapidly progressing is genetic testing; a valuable science that promotes prevention efforts for genetically susceptible people and provides new strategies for disease management. Unnaturally, and morally wrong, genetic testing is a controversial science that manipulates human ethics. Although genetic testing has enormous advantages, the uncertainties of genetic testing will depreciate our quality of life, and thereby result in psychological burden, discrimination, and abortion.
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 addressed: When should genetic testing be used? And who should have access to the results of genetic tests? As I intend to show, genetic tests should only be used for treatable diseases, and individuals should have the freedom to decide who has access to their test results.
(2) Even people that don 't have any disease could be more prepare, and prevent it from developing in the future by being more aware thanks to the genetic test provided. Genetic screening is another valuable technology that could help a parent keep track of their baby 's health by examining their chromosomes. Genetic testing and screening could impact the life all patients in a positive way, therefore the opposing side should be grateful, and take advantage of this opportunities provided. For example, a person goes to genetically test themselves in a clinic, and they come to find out that they could potentially develop heart problems in the future. Now they can be more aware, and prepared. They could in many different ways like changing their diet or exercising more so they could better protect their heart, and decrease the chances of having the heart problems, like they where presented in the genetic test. What if the person didn 't know they had a chance to have problems? and start eating unhealthy foods that could likely speed up their changes of developing a heart disease. My point is that the same thing goes to those parent who want to get a update of their unborn child 's health. Many healthy mother don 't really expect that their pregnancy will bring some implications, but in
Prenatal genetic screening in particular is a polarizing topic of discussion, more specifically, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD is one of the two techniques commonly used to genetically screen embryos in vitro; it is usually done at the eight-cell stage of division. PGD is most often performed when there is the risk that one or both parents carry disease-causing mutations. It is extensively used by high-risk individuals trying to conceive babes who will be free of particular mutations. PGD can test for over 50 genetic conditions and even allows for sex selection if there are underlying gender-associated medical conditions. When the results are satisfactory, the selected embryo is implanted into the mother’s uterus. While a controversial technique, preimplantation genetic diagnosis is one example of some of the good genetic testing can do, more benefits will be furthe...
Genetic testing has become a highly controversial issue among both the general population and the scientific community. It is a process that exposes a person’s entire genome sequence, allowing it to be read and evaluated to identify potential risks for genetic diseases or diseases that could be passed onto offspring (Holt Productions, 2012). With thousands of genetic tests already being used, and more being established, it seems logical to put this growing technology to use. Some agree that it is a person’s right to know and understand his or her genetic makeup. However, others argue that, despite the benefits of genetic testing, caution should be used to carefully inspect the risks associated with this new technology.