Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis

In the scenario regarding making the decision on aborting the child with Down Syndrome is really tough decision to take especially in Susan’s case since she was facing pregnancy difficulties

In the article “Selecting the Perfect Baby: The Ethics of “Embryo Design,” is an article about a married couple, name Larry and June Shannon. They have a daughter, four years old, name Sally, who is diagnosed with Fanconi Anemia. Therefore, the Shannons are getting help from a research team, to find the perfect bone marrow transplant for Sally. The Shannon couple is also interested in having another child and they are aware of the risks and odds of success. However, a PGD process has to be performed and the couple must undergo an IVF procedure more than once, before the implantation is successful, to be able to produce a healthy full-term baby.

A Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a test that “allows future parents to detect genetic defects that cause inherited disease in human embryos before they are implanted.” One of the most ethical questions that one might ask before considering the PGD is whether the benefits of genetic knowledge outweigh harmful effects that occur to the embryo? Is it really worth manipulating embryos genes in order to achieve the desire of the parents? Often times we have to take into considerations the risk and benefits of each situation. I believe that the PGD test should be only be done to detect genetic defects, but it should not be used to manipulate genes in order to make what to them is a “perfect” child. As stated in our text, “ In the united Kingdom alteration of an embryos genes, even for gene therapy or cloning embryos is illegal.” By manipulating genes its like going against Gods wishes. In the eyes of God every person that comes into this world is equally seen as a human being because they are all created in “ the image of God.” In this case the parents should not be allowed to manipulate the genes of their unborn child just to accommodate to their

Embryonic stem cell research is important for further development in the medical field. It strongly supports the idea that every life has value, an idea known as human dignity. Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, and thus, are all equal. The idea of radical equality before God leads us to think no less of someone regardless of their physical appearance, religious beliefs, cultural background, or anything else. It is through virtues such as charity, mercy, and justice that our human dignity is preserved. By living through these virtues and realizing how to effectively instill them within us, we are able to live a virtuous life. This paper argues that although issues involving embryonic stem cell research are controversial, research in this area is typically permissible for further development in the medical field when looking to preserve human dignity. In order to defend this thesis, this paper will be structured into three sections as followed: the description of embryonic stem cell research, the development of a moral lens, and the moral argument and analysis of this case.

Therefore because according to Kantian ethics, the unborn are considered persons (Manninen, 2008), they deserve to be treated as such, with respect to their individual desires. As the unborn cannot make their desires known, from a deontological perspective it would be unethical to interfere with the child’s natural development.

This proposal is immoral because it violates a central tenet of all civilized codes on human experimentation beginning with the Nuremberg Code: It approves doing deadly harm to a member of the human species solely for the sake of potential benefit to others. The embryos to be destroyed by researchers in this campaign are at the same stage of development as embryos in the womb who have been protected as human subjects in federally funded research since 1975.(4) President Clinton's National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) and its 1994 predecessor, the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel, conceded that the early human embryo is a form of developing human life that deserves our respect(5). Treating human life as mere research material is no way to show respect.

Gina Kolata’s article, Ethics Questions Arise as Genetic Testing of Embryos Increases (2014), explains that as the increase of the testing of embryos for parents to choose whether or not to have children has also brought its ethical questions in the light. Kolata uses the Kalinskys case, a family in the article, and how their neurological disease, Gerstmann-Straussler-Schinker (GSS), has raised questions for ethicists who have looked into the case. Kolata’s purpose in writing this article is to inform the audience on the growing topic of embryo testing and also the ethical question that also accompany in order to have the audience to develop a personal view on the issue. Given how the author explains the technical terms used within the article, Kolata is writing to an audience that is not fully aware of genetic testing.

In the article, “Stem-Cell Research Utilizing Embryonic Tissue Should Not Be Conducted”, Bertha Alvarez Manninen argues on the basis that it is unethical to allow the destruction of embryos in order to further stem-cell research, by relating it to the destruction of human life. Manninen explains the different stages of the human embryo and how it can be legally justified as a human. Therefore, an embryo can be defended by basic human rights. She supports this using Kant’s formula of humanity, which, in summary indicates that humanity should never be treated as a means to an end.

Many people when the subject of abortion is mentioned will argue their opinions without really understanding their own beliefs. Some people would say that the unborn children are not human and have no rights, but in this paper I will expound on why abortion in cases of diagnosed fetal anomaly or chromosomal abnormalities is not morally acceptable. Abortion is morally wrong not because of law, not because of a group of people decided it was but because it eliminates compassion, an innocent child’s life and it goes against the act of utilitarianism. According to Mary Warrens essay “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” the unborn child, in any of its conditions, genetic differences, or diseases, has a right to life just as

What is over-reaching? The definition may be unclear in many retrospects, but the true definition is ‘certain areas in knowledge that humans should not “explore or cross”. Throughout history there has been over-reaching of all types; examples of past and present societal over-reaching has been; Amelia Earhart attempting to circle the globe in a plane consequently ending with her disappearance over the Bermuda Triangle, the new idea of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis allowing technology to identify genetic diseases in a child’s DNA or even changing the appearance of your baby to have a “designer baby”, Henry Worsley attempting to become the first person in history to cross the Antarctic continent alone, with no aid from outside sources,

Throughout the previous thirty-eight years ago since the U.S Supreme Court legalized abortion as a medical procedure, the topic of abortion has spurned several heated debates both socially and politically. In such a heightened contemporary context, it would be rather appropriate to consider the moral application of Immanuel Kant’s philosophy, one of the greatest minds in the eighteenth centuries, to the enduring morality debate over abortion. Setting the discussion regarding the morality and immorality of abortion within the Kantian ethics framework provides one with a view that transition from the frequently inflammatory pro-choice and anti-abortion discussion points and towards a deep lucid, philosophical argument of such a controversial topic.

Since the trial of Roe vs. Wade the topic of abortion has become more commonly discussed among Americans. In addition, as time progresses there are new scientific discoveries that are being used the medical field; for example, prenatal diagnosis, “determining the sex of a fetus by an ultrasound scanning” (Junhong). Furthermore, with these medical advances it has created an issue of selective abortion, “abortions procured solely on account of a fetus's race, sex, or disability” (Berry. This essay discusses the moral judgement of the fetus by considering the case study, the utilitarian reasoning, and the Kantian reasoning when evaluating when it is morally right to use prenatal diagnosis for selective abortions.

In the United States, an estimated 2.3 million couples are considered infertile [Wekesser, 1996]. This creates a large need for infertility specialists and clinics specializing in fertility treatments. With the quickly advancing field of rep roductive services and the quest for creating better, healthier babies, a new service called Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is being offered in conjunction with In vitro fertilization.

PGD is known as pre-implantation genetic diagnosing. I do not think it is ethical to design and conceive a child that meets specific genetic requirements. I do not feel that this is an ethical reason to conceive a child. Rather, I believe all children should be seen as blessings or gifts, not sacrificial genetic progeny.

Kant was a deontological thinker and according to his theory of the Categorical Imperative, one must find a maxim in respect to abortion which they could universalize in order to discover what to do when faced with unwanted pregnancy. He doesn’t tackle this problem but he could have argued that abortion is immoral in all circumstances as he strongly believed that human life was of infinite value and that it should be protected. Furthermore, he also believed that one of the universal laws was ‘do not murder.’ Having an abortion would break this universal law and end a valuable life. However, he might also have argued that all people should have the right to determine what happens to their own body. In this case, a universal maxim might permit abortion on the