Prenatal testing is a test offered to pregnant women in their first trimester. These tests are often performed but for most of the findings there is no cure like for Down syndrome (Latendresse; Denenis, 2015). Most tests are performed in order to find a cure. However, prenatal genetic testing is mostly used for informative reasons. The test can only detect the high risk of a problem. Most of the time it is not used for diagnosis. Most prenatal tests are sensitivity test leading to false-positive results. Some test can be misleading. Some prenatal test is linked to the risk of pregnancy loss (Latendresse, Denenis, 2015). The risk with a test that is not 100% positive will always raise the question, is it really worth it in the end.
Studies
…show more content…
have revealed that some people would use prenatal testing as a way to abort the unwanted fetus. Parents with disabilities themselves may not want to test in fear that their fetus will have a disability and in fear of what others may say if something is wrong with their fetus. Many people worry that women may abort for the wrong reasons like if they have a disability, the sex or race (Hasting Center Report, 1999). Many people worry that women may abort for the wrong reasons like if they have a disability, the sex or race. There are laws that are in place to protect the fetus from being aborted without a valid reason like a negative prenatal genetic test. There are ethical concerns with the private health information.
It deals with the principle of the individuals rights. It relates to the do good and do no harm theory. This theory is a standard for treating patients. You want to do well and cause no harm. Privacy violations on the children involved in these test places a direct and indirect ethic concern. Most of the time patients are able to sign consent forms to protect their rights. However, fetus are unable to do so. This leaves major power in the parents and physicians hands (Fisher, 2006). The fetus is not given a chance because it may have a disability that the parent doesn’t want to deal with. One can say that this may be an ethical concern because life is being taken away knowingly and …show more content…
willingly. Some people have turned their attention towards the decisions that are made after women have these test.
Prior to the legislation getting involved, the patient, doctor, and insurance company controlled if and when a patient had these prenatal test. More recently, the legislation has gained more control over the abortion aspect of after testing. Some people believe that prenatal testing promotes abortion. Laws have been established to say that women can’t abort the babies for reasons like sex and race. Some of the testings can be really expensive and painful. Without health insurance, the cost can range anywhere from $1200-$2800 (Rebouche, 2015). Most people believe that the prenatal test should be up to the patient. There has been some speculation that the test are almost forced on the patient by the counselors. Typical prenatal genetic counseling sessions involve women with medically defined “high-risk” pregnancies. In the United States, this includes women over 35, women with a family history or previous pregnancy with a genetic abnormality, or women whose noninvasive screening tests indicate that their fetus/baby is at increased risk for various conditions. In a session, the counselor reviews the family medical history, summarizes risk factors for the current pregnancy and describes diagnostic testing options and risks of the procedures. Women are then given a choice of testing option, if any, they want to pursue. If a diagnostic genetic test is positive, the
interpretation and consequences of the results are also discussed (e.g., what is known about that particular genetic abnormality, if anything; social and medical support available after a birth; and the option of termination). In the end, despite their general support for non-directedness, many counselors were upfront about the ways they “go around” this professional ideal in order to help their patients. Counselors then account for the influence they may have with regard to the specific decision making surrounding prenatal diagnosis (Markens, 2013). Due to the counselors, some patients feel obligated to have the test. Suters stated the movement of prenatal testing from genetics centers to obstetrician’s offices only furthers those pressures, especially when managed care and other financial factors create incentives for physicians to spend more time testing and less time talking. While genetic testing is not mandatory, with some women it may be beneficial. Some pregnant women and families want to have the prenatal testing to prepare for specific birth plans, gather knowledge or be informed, or make final decisions to have the baby or abort. Most families want to have a prenatal diagnosis to allow them time to prepare and educate ourselves. (Eidelman, Meredith, & Saul, 2015). Prenatal testing should be reserved for women with a disability or if the mother is at risk. While the test should be reserved for women with a disability the comfort of knowing that your child is safe and healthy when pregnant is every mother to be dream. Prenatal testing is necessary in many cases and in other cases it’s only
Thomson provides the example of being hooked up for nine months to provide dialysis to an ailing violinist to expose how a fetus’s right to life does not supersede a mother’s right to make medical decisions about her body (48-49). I find that this thought experiment especially helpful in understanding how even though a fetus does have a right to life, because the continuation of their life hinges on the consent of their mother to use her body, it falls to the mother to choose whether or not to allow the fetus to develop to term.
Research on human fetal life involves numerous complex medical, moral, and legal aspects. It is not always easy, nor desirable, to seal off one aspect from another. Both sides of fetal tissue use will be equally focused on as a moral issue. The topic is a timely and important one because research on human fetal life is reportedly a growing industry and the subject of legal developments both in the United States and around the world.
The advancement and continued developments of third-party assisted reproductive medical practices has allowed many prospective parents, regardless of their marital status, age, or sexual orientation, to have a new opportunity for genetically or biologically connected children. With these developments come a number of rather complex ethical issues and ongoing discussions regarding assisted reproduction within our society today. These issues include the use of reproductive drugs, gestational services such as surrogacy as well as the rights of those seeking these drugs and services and the responsibilities of the professionals who offer and practice these services.
Ethics is the matter of the heart and when we discuss the heart we will all ways have conflict. Just for the simple fact that ethics in dealing with assisted reproductive technology is like a domino effect, when you answer one question another one arises. When we bring up the law in the United States about marital status and assisted reproductive technology (ART) you must be in a stable relationship, but what I found interesting is they have yet to define a couple, the relationship. Legislation does not allow discretion or the possibility that it was used, there is no grey area. Who qualifies; infertile couples, only married couples, gay couples, lesbian couples, HIV-positive couples what about the 60 year old couple that wants a baby. We are forgetting the single women who want babies also, who made up the rule that if you’re single you can not raise a child as well as a married couple. When bringing up people, we will naturally bring up autonomy.
second, prenatal testing, is a testing of a fetus at risk for the disease. The
There is also a high-resolution ultrasound scanning that can detect chromosomal and physical abnormalities in the first trimester as opposed to the second trimester. A technology such as this can create many ethical problems. Mcfadyen describes the biggest problem as being informed consent. “They may believe that it will provide information only about gestational age and be unaware of the range of abnormalities that can be detected. Recent research suggests that many women are not told beforehand of the first scan’s potential to detect fetal anomalies.”
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.
Spielman, B. (1995). [Review of Women and prenatal testing]. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 23, 199-201.
Test tube babies have long been stigmatized by society as the unnatural results of scientific dabbling. The words `test tube baby' have been used by school children as an insult, and many adults have seen an artificial means of giving birth as something perhaps only necessary for a lesbian woman, or a luxury item only available to the elite few. The reality is that assisted reproductive technologies (ART) have been helping infertile couples have children since 1978.1 The methods of in vitro fertilization, it's variants, and the other ART procedures are ways for persons that would otherwise have no hope of conception to conceive and, in a rapidly growing percentage of cases, give birth to healthy babies. As the technology has developed, the quality and range of assistance has developed as well. At present, the means of assisted reproduction and the capabilities of these procedures has grown at a somewhat dizzying pace. However, thought to the repercussions of the applications of ART are being disregarded to some extent while the public's knowledge and the understanding of embryologists and geneticists surges forward. It is possible given consideration to things such as the morality of these techniques, the unexplored alternative uses of these procedures, and the potential impact they posses that further development is unnecessary and possibly dangerous.
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.
As we approach the 21st century, we as a society are increasingly bombarded with technical advances. One such area of advancement is the research involved with the Human Genome Mapping Project (HGMP). HGMP is a multi-billion dollar world wide research collaboration interested in sequencing the entire human genome. Started on October 1, 1990, with a group of over 350 labs, and expected to finish within the next 5 to 7 years, the Human Genome Mapping Project has given rise to many important advancements and many discoveries about the genetic make-up of humans (Bylinsky, 1994). With these advances come many ethical questions and concerns. The ability to screen an individual for specific disease will, in the future, play a major role in each of our lives. Genetic screening is defined in Genethics, by Suzuki and Knudson (1990), as "the examination of the genetic constitution of an individual - whether a fetus, a young child or a mature adult - in search of clues to the likelihood that this person will develop or transmit a heritable defect or disease."
First of all, I want to start by saying that I 'm not discriminating the disabled community, but this is a very large number that could possibly be diminished with the help of genetic testing. (1) I believe that there is nothing wrong with testing the genes of an unborn child to possibly determine if it could develop a genetic disorder in the future. One of the advantages that genetic testing provides is that the parents could now be informed of the situation, and keep track of their unborn child 's health. I 'm sure those parents are pleased with this technology, and the chances to be able to keep track of their baby. This a baby, and is something very precious, and valuable, and I believe that parents want to keep track of anything that may happen with the unborn child. I 'm sure that a large amount of people would agree would agree that they don 't want to suddenly take the hard hit. When the news is presented in the delivery room. This serves more as an advantage than a disadvantage, due to the fact parents. Pull be more prepared, or possibly have the option to abort it. This is a right that the parents should have regardless of the opposing side arguments towards it. Im a hundred percent sure that the opposing side has very strong arguments towards genetics testing, and one of the main ones is "playing God." The opposing side believed that some things in
Schroedel, Jean Reith. Is the Fetus a person? A Comparison of Policies across the Fifty States . Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2000.
Udo Schuklenk, PhD, and Anita Kleinsmidt, LLB, LLM, Rethinking Mandatory HIV Testing During Pregnancy in Areas With High HIV Prevalence Rates: Ethical and Policy Issues, American Journal of Public Health , Vol 97, No. 7, 1179-83, July 2007
Genetic testing can help people determine why they get cancer or other diseases. Genetic testing is recommended to people who have a family history of a genetic disease, have children who are born with genetic defects, and have gone through more than one miscarriage in the past. Though these te...