Now we have a clear description of the truth about genetic diagnosis, prenatal screening, and abortion. It's far too likely to be the story of the near future of genetics, "regenerative medicine," and all those up and coming forms of unethical, destructive research to "improve" the human genome.
Thanks to the email list of Dianne N. Irving, Ph.D. (a human embryologist and ethicist), here's an interview at the Center for Bioethics and Culture (watch out for the virtual hostess - or could she be "docent")), between the founder of the CBC, Jennifer Lahl, and M.L. Tina Stevens and Diane Beeson.
From Beeson:
When I was younger I believed the confident predictions of the geneticists that selective abortion was merely a temporary solution; within a few years we would have cures for all these conditions and we would not be practicing prenatal eugenics. The fact is the cures haven’t come, but the eugenic functions of reproductive genetics have expanded. For example, I learned years ago that we could eliminate most neural tube defects by addressing folic acid (a B vitamin) deficiencies in women. We chose instead to put our resources into massive prenatal screening programs throughout the country.
Thank you, Ms. Beeson.
2 comments:
Part of my job in a clinical molecular biology lab is to perform cystic fibrosis genetic testing. The orginal intent was to help physicians diagnose CF. Increasingly, the test is being ordered for pregnant women to see if they carry a CF mutation. If she is positive, inevitably we see the father's sample a week later looking to see if he also carries a CF mutation. Myself and my co-workers were interested in finding out that some CF advocacy groups dislike this practice because of the very reasons Beeson mentions. They fear that if it becomes routine to abort babies with CF (or even those with a chance of having CF), and the incidence of CF declines, funding for a cure will dry up leaving those who suffer with the disease without hope.
Thank you for speaking up.
Post a Comment