Osteogenesis Imperfecta

“We regard all life as being a 'gift' from God. The practice of PGD would seem to imply that the lives of some may be regarded as 'gift' while the lives of others are to be regarded as 'burden'. Given the Catholic position on IVF, discriminatory selection and the destruction of embryos, we do not support PGD being used for the sake of selecting some embryos and discarding others.” The Catholic Church believes that every type of life is important and should be respected. Being able to choose what embryos you do and do not want pose the issue that prejudice and discrimination is still present today and with this new technology could continue to grow in the future. From the Catholic perspective there is “essentially no difference between the

death of an embryo and the death of a fetus.”

Opinion 2 Stella Young a disability activist is pro choice.
Stella has osteogenesis imperfecta and says she doesn’t consider her disease to be a bad thing but instead something that has “enriched” her and her families lives.

She believes that if we lived in a society where rights were equal, disabilities and genetic defects wouldn’t be seen as a disadvantage. She however believes that is should be the choice of the couple to whether or not they believe they can parent a child with a disease. She mentions that people who ask “what about the suffering” come from positions of privilege and ignorance. She states the assumption that my life has involved suffering is prejudice. She thinks that it should be a personal choice and whatever that choice may be should be respected.

Opinion 3- Embryologist at fertility associates Mel Barret is for PGD.
Mel is a embryologist at Fertility Associates and completely for PGD. She says it’s an excellent way to help families decrease the amount of disease not only in their family but in society. Mel has a 95% success rate and suggests that although the process is long and invasive the end result is worth it. Mel is however bias as it is her job to promote her work in order to gain money and a future job for

herself.
Personally I agree with the procedure of PGD to an extent.

I believe that it is a personal choice and if there is any way you can avoid carrying a severe and deathly disease to the next generation then why wouldn’t you do it? PGD can help increase the chance of a couple to conceive and reduce miscarriages without having to rely on a donor or surrogate- the child will be biological. Although the process is expensive, lengthy and intense, no one would put themselves through that if this isn’t what they wanted- the benefits outweigh the flaws. Although PGD is destroying the potential for life, the embryo wouldn’t have a heart beat nor a functioning brain and every month women lose eggs during their period. I also believe that it is ok to discard an embryo that is a carrier. If you can completely discard the genetic disorder from your family then future generations will not have to worry about and go through the same process. PGD is completely legal in New Zealand and you have the opportunity to not only prevent but stop the suffering that you may have seen firsthand from another family member. I don’t however agree with sex selection. I don’t believe that your gender is a disease and something that should be controlled. Also gender imbalance is a current problem in India since the last five decades the sex ratio has been moving around 930 of females to that of 1000 of males. This issue could become a very real problem in our current society today with proof from Australia in

2004 with couples favoring female embryos to male embryos 8:2. Similarly with designer babies, personality and intelligence are taught and earned- I believe it’s unnatural to choose how intelligent a child is and the quality of a child's personality. I also don’t agree with selecting and editing embryos for beauty. This could not only potentially increase discrimination against parents and designer babies but in the future if this technology takes off, those babies who haven’t been artificially enhanced. I believe PGD should be used for selecting against serious and severe genetic defects not as a superficial, cosmetic tool. I agree with everything that is legal in New Zealand today regarding PGD as it can prevent families from carrying severe and deathly genetic defects to the next generation.
My proposed actions would be to raise awareness about this topic-before biology I had no idea what PGD was. Society doesn’t really address it that publicly and not everyone understands the reason behind why couples are choosing to use this technology. I believe embryologists need to go around schools and educate teenagers about what this technology can do- due to the fact 40-60% of new Zealanders will encounter a genetic defect in their life time. Because virtually everything is online, a more clear and general page should be set up. I found that fertility associates and other big company’s websites are quite daunting and sites are filled with confusing technical terms that are hard to understand as well as leaving out some important information and statistics. I believe this would be effective as it would be more accessible and if it was simplified more people would be willing to understand. Personally I could bring up PGD in social situations around friends and families. But considering my age at this point in time, PGD is not yet relevant to myself or any of my friends or family. I could also put up a few posters round the school however in terms of society and the world this will not be that effective. I would also suggest increasing the number of government funded cycles as this would increase the pregnancy success rate, and aid those who are finically disadvantaged. I feel this would be very effective as the waiting list would be tended to faster meaning more couples are able to conceive. However I have no relation to the government and I doubt they would consider a 17 year olds proposal- especially since the government has various other programs in need of funding.
The sources of information I have obtained is reasonably reliable as I have been on pages of companies like Fertility Associates and The Fertility Institutes. However I have also been on websites that are set out more like a university paper. These papers are written generally by one person or a group of like-minded individuals. These usually lean in the direction of their viewpoints regarding the procedure of PGD. For example The Nathaniel centers website- New Zealand bioethics center because of their morals and views against PGD and conceiving artificially their information was reasonably bias towards the argument against PGD. I also think the government should give more support and funding to those women over 37. If the government funded and supported those women at a younger age beaus their fertility rates are higher they may not have to go through more than one cycle of IVF meaning the government will be spending less money on PGD fees.