Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis girl or boy you pick!

Fri, Jun 24, 2011

In the July 23, 2002 issue of the Los Angeles Times Newspaper, there was an article entitled “A Girl or a Boy, You Pick” written by Aaron Zitner. The article discusses the embryo-sorting technique called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis or “PGD” and how embryo sorting makes it possible to screen for gender and diseases prior to implantation in the uterus. In the article, the author brings up some of the ethical questions PGD raises with regard to the embryos no one wants. Is it proper to discard an embryo based on its genes or gender? Which lives are not worth living? Who decides? In this paper I will argue against embryo selection for these reasons: First of all, PGD is the ultimate form of discrimination, a discrimination based on the very building blocks of a person’s life; secondly if PGD technology was available and used years ago the world more than likely would have lost the great ideals and works of contributors with genetically acquired disabilities.

In the last few years a genetic basis has been discovered not just for various illnesses, but for such behavioral traits as shyness, sexual promiscuity, musical ability, risk-taking and over-eating and in the future it may be possible to select for genes that contribute to higher IQ, better eyesight, etc. PGD allows parents to specify that their children will not suffer from any “defects”. But by who’s standard do we define “defects”? Where do we draw the line? Isn’t this genetic selection process the ultimate form of discrimination? Many parents will leap at the chance to make their children smarter, healthier and prettier and the ethical concerns will be overshadowed by the promise of creating better children. I believe that almost every parent would choose to genetically engineer their child when presented the question “Do you want to tamper with nature or would you rather leave your offspring to chance?” The way I see it, utilizing PGD technology to order “designer babies” will only limit the wonderful diversity of the human race.

A concern not addressed by supporters of PGD is how the children of the future who are not “genetically engineered” will function in society and if they will be able to compete. Will they spend their lives feeling they are not good enough or wishing they were more perfect. The consequences of such a world are considered in the movie Gattaca where children are labeled for life as a “valid” or an “in-valid”. As shown in the movie the “perfect” genetic human specimens known as “valids” are not any happier or better adjusted than those “in-valids” who have not been genetically “adjusted”. Before we all jump into the “gene age” we need to consider what impact technologies like PGD will have on those that use them, the children who are born from them and on society as a whole.

Another important issue that needs to be examined is that if PGD technology was available and used years ago what would have happened to the embryos with genetic “defects” that grew to become the great idealists, scientists, artists, etc. of our world? Since PGD makes it possible to screen embryos not only for gender, but for whether they carry the genes involved in cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia and more than 100 other inherited diseases, many of the world’s greatest minds and talents could have been lost in the test tube. For example, Stephen Hawking, one of our time’s greatest astrophysicists, has ALS, a disease that develops as a result of a defective gene. What a great loss for our society it would have been if Hawking’s parents were able to know that he would develop this debilitating disease and terminated his existence at the preconception level.

As illustrated on a list of famous people with disabilities on The Wayne State University website (http://www.eas.wayne.edu/fam_people.html) many of our great contributors such as Albert Einstein, Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison and Walt Disney had learning disabilities and many others were born with genetic “defects” such as dyslexia, blindness and deafness. What if they had been discarded as embryos? Where would we all be today without their vision?

Advocates for the disabled argue against rejecting embryos destined to have severe disease. Deborah Kaplan, executive director of the World Institute on Disability in Oakland is quoted in the article as saying: “Most people with disabilities rate their quality of life as much higher than other people think. People make the decision to reject embryos based on a prejudice that having a disability means having a low quality of life”. It is actually impossible for one person to predict and decide if another’s life will be worth living since quality of life is so subjective. In his article, Zitner quotes Tracy Otte, a woman who is using genetic selection trying to have a child and avoid the muscular dystrophy that killed her two brothers in their early 20′s. She says, It’s scary to have this power, if this technology was there, would my brothers ever have been born? Their lives definitely had value but it was also tragic to see how young they died.” In my opinion, PGD provides us with too much information and forces us to make the difficult decision of which embryos live and which are discarded . Since we cannot see into the future we are not ethically equipped to make those decisions.

Dr. Mark Hughes of Wayne State University in Detroit who helped develop embryo diagnosis takes a different position on PGD. In the article he is quoted as saying: “Some people that have known genetic predispositions in the family gene line often roll the dice and hope for the best or they become pregnant and use a prenatal test such as amniocentesis followed by abortion if the test turns up a problem.” He believes that with embryo sorting, these people can start their pregnancy on Day One with the knowledge their child will be healthy. He also poses the question “how can it be more ethically troublesome to test before a pregnancy than later when a fetus has a heartbeat and moving?”

I do agree with the Dr. Hughes’ position that abortion is an evasive procedure that often carries a great emotional burden. However, embryo screening allows parents to judge and reject many potential children at once. Since it bypasses the pain of abortion, what is to keep people from abusing the procedure to reject not only the embryos that are unhealthy but the embryos because they are merely undesirable?

Although the use of PGD research offers the benefit of breeding out certain forms of disease, as stated in the article, some fertility specialists say that scientists are bound to create tests not only for disease but for various traits such as height, weight, and skin tone. How the genetic selection capabilities of PGD may ultimately be used has a striking parallel to the discrimination demonstrated by the eugenics movement of the early 1900′s. This movement was literally an effort to breed better human beings by encouraging the reproduction of people with “good” genes and discouraging reproduction of those with “bad” genes. American Eugenicists effectively lobbied for social legislation to keep racial and ethnic groups separate, to restrict immigration from southern and eastern Europe, and to sterilize people considered “genetically unfit.” Elements of the American eugenics movement were models for the Nazis, whose radical adaptation of eugenics culminated in the Holocaust. (Reference: http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/) . Fortunately, society as a whole recognized the eugenics philosophy as discriminative and inhumane and adamantly rejected it and PGD should also be rejected for the same reasons. PGD arms humans with God-like powers to alter the world which we should not do without carefully examining the consequences.

In conclusion, I believe that having the power to screen out the traits that are perceived as “defects” in our society will only cost us more than we gain since the concept of selecting a “perfect” human being before conception completely eliminates individuality. Just think of the inventions we have today that were created so blind people can read, so short people can reach. By taking away the genes that make us all different we will be destined to a future void of creativity and vision since there will be no need for diversity in the tools we use to live our lives. Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis will only lead us to a society where how far you go depends on what you’re made of.