Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Controversy of genetic testing
The pros and cons of genetic testing
The pros and cons of genetic testing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Controversy of genetic testing
Dialogue
Doctor: Good afternoon, Sir.
Chief: Good afternoon! What brings you here?
Doctor: I wanted to discuss something I have had a concern about for quite some time. It concerns about genetic screening, or testing.
Chief: What about it?
Doctor: Sometimes mutations are unharmful. For example, polymorphisms, which can alter physical appearance and affect traits such as hair color, eye color, etc. However, there are also mutations that can lead to diseases. And when people get these diseases like Huntington's, Alzheimer's, breast cancer, and malignant melanoma, it can become heritable. It would be great if we could know if individuals were predisposed to the disease. Normally, these would be passed down and families who would be aware of
…show more content…
If you agree with me, I would like to take it a step further and go to higher officials to spread my proposal: Should genetic testing be required for those who have a family history of genetic disease?
Chief: Why would we require that?
Doctor: It provides many benefits. One benefit of being tested or screened includes employers having knowledge of their employee's health for accommodations. Similar to this, couples could use their knowledge for parental planning. And if they find that their child does have a disorder or is susceptible to one, they are able to make informed decisions for the sake of their child’s health and future. Lastly, if the disorder or disease present is treatable, individuals are able to plan in advance for treatment.
Chief: Why should we require those who come from a family history of genetic disease to be genetically
…show more content…
Chief: Earlier you mentioned that it would be beneficial in the workplace. However it can also be disadvantageous. People worry that corporations will use this knowledge to discriminate against their workers. They may worry that they will consider these results of genetic tests when they are applying.
Doctor: Yes, I understand sir. But I feel like we already do something similar to this with drug tests.
Chief: The usage of recreational drugs are controllable by the user. Genetics are not something they can control. In fact, during in the 1970s, there was a corporation called the Du Pont Corporation that screened only African Americans because they wanted to test them for the sickle cell trait since it was quite common in Africa. Do you see how another problem can arise?
Doctor: Racial discrimination? Or at least it would seem like it since races share common genes that control the similar traits.
Chief: Exactly. And, if the corporation does decide to hire the person who may become seriously ill or disabled—regardless of their race— it may just be cheaper to not hire them altogether rather than having to pay for workers compensation and covering their health
Dorothy Roberts is social justice advocate and law scholar who preaches the message that race-based medicine is bad medicine. She believes that doctors use race, instead of tests and observations, as a shortcut to give diagnoses. Her main argument is that there is only one race, the human race. In her Ted Talk, Roberts goes over statistics to explain why she thinks that race-based medicine is barbaric and shouldn’t be practiced.
Guidelines like these need to be formed into a federal law that people can pass in one way or another so that we can be protected from the various forms of discrimination that is possible with this kind of information. The public should be aware of what could happen if this kind of information could become public knowledge, and of the opportunities that the knowledge brings. There is no doubt that the information from genetic analysis is going to help a lot of people with all sorts of problems live longer and healthier lives. The only problem is that we have to keep the information in the hands of those who need it, and out of the hands of those who would use the information to profit or discriminate.
Advantages of genetic testing may be helpful in determining whether or not you have a disease or are proba...
NitroMed’s study marks a growing movement that has begun to cite genetic makeup, specifically race-related genetic makeup, rather than environmental or other confounding factors as the source of disease. This shift in presumed cause of health-related problems raises many troubling implications. With race-based therapeutics comes the assumption that there are biological differences between races. The dangers of such implications are vast, the most pressing problem being the ambiguity of race, particularly with regard to genetic composition. Considerable studies have demonstrated the lack of genotypic correlations among members of a given race. Similarly, socioeconomic and other confounding variables have a profound impact on health and thus must be considered in the discussion of race-based therapeutics and research. This tension between social and biological conceptions of race is now at the forefront of discussion among scientific scholars seeking explanations for the relationship of disease and ethnicity (Foster 844).
By using identified gene mutations that are known to cause diseases, asymptomatic individuals are able to discover if they are at risk for specific genetic conditions; this is known as genetic testing. Unfortunately, genetic testing can vary in its predictive ability. For example, Huntington disease, Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, Fragile X syndrome and multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 are conditions that can be determined by genetic testing (Samen, 1996). In contrast, for multifaceted diseases like Alzheimer’s, breast and ovarian cancer and colorectal cancer, predisposition can be determined with genetic testing. However, an absolute diagnosis of those diseases cannot be made (Heshka et al., 2008).
.... As of now, people are being discriminated through employment and insurance companies but it can lead to something bigger and worse.
... to be practical doctors would need be able to identify all of the genes in each of their patients bodies and analyze them in a timely fashion, in order to give them timely and proper medical advice. Right now this is unrealistic. Therefore they use racial profiling, not in order to discriminate, but in order to give the best and most efficient medical advice possible.
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.
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.
Murphy, Samantha. "Genetic Tests Debate: Is Too Much Info Bad for Your Health?"LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 19 Dec. 2010. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
However, this statement (more in-depth than the previous AMA opinion) references Safer v. Estate of Pack and Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California (1976) as background for the duty to warn but leaves out any mention of Molloy v. Meier which I believe is a stronger and more direct case addressing actual genetic information and confidentiality. It is of note however that the statement is long and delves as deep as international law and does well to have a discussion on how genetic medicine is both “individual and familial” which can create confidentiality conflicts but recognizes that statutory and court made protections have evolved to create a protective layer for a physician or genetic
Genetic testing is the process of sequencing six billion letters of a human genome to possibly discover genetic differences, such as how cells carry the same genome but at the same time look and function different. Genetic testing is also the process that can give foresight into pathological diseases such as different types of cancer.
Genetic testing, also known as screening, is a rapidly advancing new scientific field that can potentially revolutionize not only the world of medicine, but many aspects of our lives. Genetic screening is the sequencing of human DNA in order to discover genetic differences, anomalies, or mutations that may prove pathological. As genetic screening becomes more advanced and easily accessible, it presents society with difficult questions that must be asked about the boundaries of science and to what degree we are allowed to tamper with the human genome. To better understand the potential impact of genetic screening on our society, we must examine the potential benefits in comparison to the possible negative impact it may cause. With this knowledge in hand, we can examine what the future holds for this field of study and the best possible direction to take.
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
Other people can’t find jobs because of disabilities or health problems. If someone gets into a car accident and gets physically injured long-term or becomes disabled, it becomes difficult to do many types of jobs. In another case a person may become ill and not be able to work for a long period of time or at all.