Moral Issues in Technology: Ethical Issues Raised by Prenatal DNA Sequencing Modern technology allows us to prenatally diagnose birth defects related to genetic disorders inherited from the family. Examples of these disorders are abnormal body growth, mental retardation and other conditions that could affect the child and parents in the future. A new technology called prenatal screening is used to detect such irregularities before delivery. Prenatal screening for the diagnosis of specific fetal pathologies has become essential prenatal care for some women. Testing techniques range from advanced non-invasive to invasive techniques, but this article focuses on the invasive techniques used during this procedure. Two well-known invasive tests are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis, where cells are removed from the fetus and analyzed under a microscope. Geneticists can then determine if the fetus has too few or too many chromosomes, or if the chromosomes are damaged and could cause a genetic problem. This rapidly emerging technology raises the following question: “Is it morally permissible to use prenatal screening to terminate a pregnancy on the basis of observed genetic disorders?” » Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay In order to answer this research question, these ethical concerns will be evaluated: the accuracy of the tests, the importance of medical information on the consequences of a particular genetic disease, the associated risk and the societal pressure on the decision of an individual. Conversely, some claim that this technology could improve the well-being of parents and children. The moral actors considered are the parents as well as the fetus, because both can see their lives better or worse thanks to technology. In this analysis, they are considered equally important.Moral analysis This chapter consists of arguments that defend the moral permissibility of the use of prenatal screening. These arguments are the accuracy of the approach, the medical information provided, the risks included and the societal pressure. Accuracy In most cases, genetic testing (non-invasive) is offered to pregnant women during the first appointment between the doctor and the pregnant woman. Parents are free to decide whether or not they want the procedure to be carried out. Screening tests can assess the possibility that the embryo has certain common birth defects. However, they cannot indicate with certainty whether the child has a genetic disorder, as the accuracy is about 10% lower than invasive tests. A prenatal genetic screening has an accuracy of around 90-95% and there is also a 2.5% rate where results can be false positive. It is inaccurate, contradictory and, moreover, an inadequate test does not provide judgment on disabilities, but rather on the probability that a possible child suffers from a disorder, which may or may not be true. However, these disorders can affect different people in different ways. While some of them require more medical attention, others can lead a healthy life. If parents make a decision based on inaccurate results, they could accidentally make a decision that ends a child's birth safely.health. This technology would therefore not be morally admissible. Medical Information Before and after receiving the information provided by prenatal genetic screening, all parents should be informed of their situation. Prior information is necessary as this may constitute a risk for the mother or child. Additional information is needed after screening to know what to expect from a child with Down syndrome. Promote individuals' freedom of choice, complete and neutral information must be provided to parents about screening processes and their consequences. It is important to have information about the consequences of having a child with Down syndrome, because different genetic conditions lead to widely varying consequences in terms of the child's quality of life. Depending on the severity of their pathology, a person with Down syndrome can either lead a relatively independent existence with some help for daily living, or be forced to live in an environment for non-autonomous people. Some studies show that in some prenatal screening programs, the explanations given by health professionals were considered inadequate, unclear or insufficient by mothers, as well as the professionals' understanding of certain aspects of the technological process was deficient. Parents' perceptions are also influenced by the opinions of the health personnel providing the information. It seems that the specialization of professionals, religion, gender, the number of children they have and their ethnic origin can influence the information they transmit and, consequently, the choices offered to parents. The complexity of genetics coupled with the notion of risk makes the information provided even more difficult for parents to understand, especially when they are vulnerable and anxious about an important decision concerning their child. The wait time for results and the uncertainty about the results are a source of stress and anxiety for future parents. Risks Non-invasive screening tests are safe for the mother and fetus. However, this is not the case for invasive diagnosis. Invasive diagnostic tests can detect many genetic conditions caused by imperfections in a gene or chromosome. They can indicate the existence of a genetic problem with great accuracy, but some diagnostic tests are risky and can lead to miscarriage. The pregnant woman is at risk, both physical and psychological, during the testing process. Even though the probability of miscarriage is low, it remains present. This risk of fetal loss also includes healthy fetuses that could have been born alive and healthy if the diagnostic test had not been carried out (Health and Commissioner, 2008, 20). In conclusion, the implementation of the test can give a final result to that of people in the medical world; parents; family members and people in society really want to prevent this from happening. Consequentialism states that an act is morally permissible if and only if (and because) it promotes as much good, considered impartially, as any other available act of action. This technology which allows accidental termination of a pregnancy is not acceptable because it does not promote good, but on the contrary carries a risk of death of a child. The death of a perfectly healthy fetus is a huge risk that can have various negative side effects on the parents (emotionally and even on the mother's health). From here we can say that this technology is fatally prohibited. Pressure from society Every individual should have the opportunity to make their own decision whether they want to or notchildren. Despite the contrary, the perceptions of future parents are influenced by the perceptions of society. The parents' choices, whether or not to carry out the diagnostic test which could lead them to decide whether or not to keep the child, are a reflection of social trends, for example the state of mind of society towards people disabled people and their thinking. of “normality”. In general, prenatal diagnostic tests take place in a context of social pressure which can considerably restrict parents' freedom of choice. Undergoing prenatal genetic testing involves the preliminary belief that terminating a pregnancy or agreeing to give birth to a genetically disabled fetus both represent reasonable choices in our society. This is the reason why using this prenatal diagnostic technology is not an option for some people. Individuals have an obligation to evaluate the moral standards of their society, reject them if they are wrong, and do the right thing. But as mentioned previously, parents' understanding can be influenced by a number of different factors that range from culture, religion, sexual orientation, past experience and of course societal pressure . How society treats prenatal diagnosis will impact social values: moral, legal and ethical perspectives. Societal pressure can have a negative mental and physical influence on expectant parents. If the parents' well-being is negatively affected, then it is morally not permissible to use this technology. Making the case for moral permissibility The strongest claims against the permissibility of prenatal screening are presented in this section. Additionally, counterarguments to these arguments are provided after each argument. The first claim argues that parents should have the right not to have a child if his genetic condition makes him such that they are unable to provide him with sufficient care. The second claim approaches the moral question from the perspective of social hedonism and argues that optimal overall well-being is achieved whenever the child is not born. Providing Adequate Care To decide whether prenatal screening is morally permissible, further consideration is given to the goodness of the outcome of its use. Although several factors are important in determining this, the well-being of the parents (and therefore the well-being of the child) is examined. A big part of promoting a child's well-being is caring for them and spending time with them. When a couple is expecting a child, they often think about how this child will affect their life. Based on their findings, they might make lifestyle changes so they can adequately care for the child. However, if after the birth of the child it turns out that he suffers from a genetic disease, for example Down syndrome, then the parents' lives are affected in a different way than they expected. were waiting. Even if financial support as well as support from family caregivers is available, parents' lives will still be heavily influenced. Not only is the intensity of care these children need increasing, but also the duration for which they need it. While most children become independent as they grow up, several genetic disorders significantly limit or even prevent affected individuals from becoming independent from their parents. Through prenatal DNA sequencing, a child's genetic disorders can be identified in the early stages of pregnancy. Having this information would allow parents to make a more informed decision.informed about whether they have the capacity to care for their child. Allowing parents to have this information will ensure that sufficient care is provided to the child, making their life better than it would have been without that care. Besides the child's life, that of the parents is also affected. Parents will have fewer (unexpected) compromises to make in their lives. Although most parents will do this willingly, they may find themselves in a situation where they are forced to make unexpected life changes in order to provide adequate care for their child. Additionally, having a child with a genetic disease causes a lot of stress for parents. If the parents had known about the genetic condition at an early stage of pregnancy, they could have made an informed decision about whether or not to continue the pregnancy. Less knowledge of the genetic state of the unborn child will allow parents who consider themselves incapable of providing sufficient care to terminate the pregnancy. Parents have the right to make this informed decision and the technology that allows them to do so is therefore morally permissible. The above argument indicates that information obtained through the use of this technology can be used by parents to make an informed decision about whether they will have the capacity to care for the child. Since this relies on an assumption about the amount of care the child would need, it is not morally permissible because not all children with Down syndrome need the same care. People tend to take worst-case scenarios on which to base their decisions when deciding issues like the one described in this argument. Another objection to this argument is that every child should have equal opportunities and that the decision as to whether a child fits their parents' lifestyle should not be based on genetic discrepancies, as this gives parents the option to discriminate and use other genetic information to choose. a child who fits their ideas of the perfect child. This idea was also published by all participants in the survey conducted in the following document. They agreed that unconditional acceptance of children is the most laudable approach. Another objection raised in this article is the obsession with physical perfection in society. This approach could put even greater social pressure on people with disabilities in the future, because it is not one hundred percent accurate and does not mean that no children with disabilities will be born in the future. This type of decision-making based on possibly incorrect information and assumptions about a child's life should therefore not be allowed. Child welfare An argument for this technology based on the welfare of the child and parents will be considered. Suppose a woman is pregnant and the test results show that the child has a genetic disease. The birth might be less favorable due to the fact that the child might suffer and have a poor quality of life due to their disabilities. Examining this situation from the perspective of well-being hedonism, according to which well-being depends solely on the presence of happiness/pleasure and the absence of pain/suffering, could lead to the conclusion that in this situation , it would be more favorable if the child is not born, so this would promote the greatest total well-being in this situation. Under these conditions, the information provided by the prenatal test may be important for the outcome of this scenario and an argument can be concluded that the information provided by this technology has the potential to make informed decisions leading to a 1095-5054.

Essay / Moral Issues in Technology: Ethical Issues Raised by Prenatal DNA Sequencing Modern technology allows us to prenatally diagnose birth defects related to genetic disorders inherited from the family. Examples of these disorders are abnormal body growth, mental retardation and other conditions that could affect the child and parents in the future. A new technology called prenatal screening is used to detect such irregularities before delivery. Prenatal screening for the diagnosis of specific fetal pathologies has become essential prenatal care for some women. Testing techniques range from advanced non-invasive to invasive techniques, but this article focuses on the invasive techniques used during this procedure. Two well-known invasive tests are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis, where cells are removed from the fetus and analyzed under a microscope. Geneticists can then determine if the fetus has too few or too many chromosomes, or if the chromosomes are damaged and could cause a genetic problem. This rapidly emerging technology raises the following question: “Is it morally permissible to use prenatal screening to terminate a pregnancy on the basis of observed genetic disorders?” » Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay In order to answer this research question, these ethical concerns will be evaluated: the accuracy of the tests, the importance of medical information on the consequences of a particular genetic disease, the associated risk and the societal pressure on the decision of an individual. Conversely, some claim that this technology could improve the well-being of parents and children. The moral actors considered are the parents as well as the fetus, because both can see their lives better or worse thanks to technology. In this analysis, they are considered equally important.Moral analysis This chapter consists of arguments that defend the moral permissibility of the use of prenatal screening. These arguments are the accuracy of the approach, the medical information provided, the risks included and the societal pressure. Accuracy In most cases, genetic testing (non-invasive) is offered to pregnant women during the first appointment between the doctor and the pregnant woman. Parents are free to decide whether or not they want the procedure to be carried out. Screening tests can assess the possibility that the embryo has certain common birth defects. However, they cannot indicate with certainty whether the child has a genetic disorder, as the accuracy is about 10% lower than invasive tests. A prenatal genetic screening has an accuracy of around 90-95% and there is also a 2.5% rate where results can be false positive. It is inaccurate, contradictory and, moreover, an inadequate test does not provide judgment on disabilities, but rather on the probability that a possible child suffers from a disorder, which may or may not be true. However, these disorders can affect different people in different ways. While some of them require more medical attention, others can lead a healthy life. If parents make a decision based on inaccurate results, they could accidentally make a decision that ends a child's birth safely.health. This technology would therefore not be morally admissible. Medical Information Before and after receiving the information provided by prenatal genetic screening, all parents should be informed of their situation. Prior information is necessary as this may constitute a risk for the mother or child. Additional information is needed after screening to know what to expect from a child with Down syndrome. Promote individuals' freedom of choice, complete and neutral information must be provided to parents about screening processes and their consequences. It is important to have information about the consequences of having a child with Down syndrome, because different genetic conditions lead to widely varying consequences in terms of the child's quality of life. Depending on the severity of their pathology, a person with Down syndrome can either lead a relatively independent existence with some help for daily living, or be forced to live in an environment for non-autonomous people. Some studies show that in some prenatal screening programs, the explanations given by health professionals were considered inadequate, unclear or insufficient by mothers, as well as the professionals' understanding of certain aspects of the technological process was deficient. Parents' perceptions are also influenced by the opinions of the health personnel providing the information. It seems that the specialization of professionals, religion, gender, the number of children they have and their ethnic origin can influence the information they transmit and, consequently, the choices offered to parents. The complexity of genetics coupled with the notion of risk makes the information provided even more difficult for parents to understand, especially when they are vulnerable and anxious about an important decision concerning their child. The wait time for results and the uncertainty about the results are a source of stress and anxiety for future parents. Risks Non-invasive screening tests are safe for the mother and fetus. However, this is not the case for invasive diagnosis. Invasive diagnostic tests can detect many genetic conditions caused by imperfections in a gene or chromosome. They can indicate the existence of a genetic problem with great accuracy, but some diagnostic tests are risky and can lead to miscarriage. The pregnant woman is at risk, both physical and psychological, during the testing process. Even though the probability of miscarriage is low, it remains present. This risk of fetal loss also includes healthy fetuses that could have been born alive and healthy if the diagnostic test had not been carried out (Health and Commissioner, 2008, 20). In conclusion, the implementation of the test can give a final result to that of people in the medical world; parents; family members and people in society really want to prevent this from happening. Consequentialism states that an act is morally permissible if and only if (and because) it promotes as much good, considered impartially, as any other available act of action. This technology which allows accidental termination of a pregnancy is not acceptable because it does not promote good, but on the contrary carries a risk of death of a child. The death of a perfectly healthy fetus is a huge risk that can have various negative side effects on the parents (emotionally and even on the mother's health). From here we can say that this technology is fatally prohibited. Pressure from society Every individual should have the opportunity to make their own decision whether they want to or notchildren. Despite the contrary, the perceptions of future parents are influenced by the perceptions of society. The parents' choices, whether or not to carry out the diagnostic test which could lead them to decide whether or not to keep the child, are a reflection of social trends, for example the state of mind of society towards people disabled people and their thinking. of “normality”. In general, prenatal diagnostic tests take place in a context of social pressure which can considerably restrict parents' freedom of choice. Undergoing prenatal genetic testing involves the preliminary belief that terminating a pregnancy or agreeing to give birth to a genetically disabled fetus both represent reasonable choices in our society. This is the reason why using this prenatal diagnostic technology is not an option for some people. Individuals have an obligation to evaluate the moral standards of their society, reject them if they are wrong, and do the right thing. But as mentioned previously, parents' understanding can be influenced by a number of different factors that range from culture, religion, sexual orientation, past experience and of course societal pressure . How society treats prenatal diagnosis will impact social values: moral, legal and ethical perspectives. Societal pressure can have a negative mental and physical influence on expectant parents. If the parents' well-being is negatively affected, then it is morally not permissible to use this technology. Making the case for moral permissibility The strongest claims against the permissibility of prenatal screening are presented in this section. Additionally, counterarguments to these arguments are provided after each argument. The first claim argues that parents should have the right not to have a child if his genetic condition makes him such that they are unable to provide him with sufficient care. The second claim approaches the moral question from the perspective of social hedonism and argues that optimal overall well-being is achieved whenever the child is not born. Providing Adequate Care To decide whether prenatal screening is morally permissible, further consideration is given to the goodness of the outcome of its use. Although several factors are important in determining this, the well-being of the parents (and therefore the well-being of the child) is examined. A big part of promoting a child's well-being is caring for them and spending time with them. When a couple is expecting a child, they often think about how this child will affect their life. Based on their findings, they might make lifestyle changes so they can adequately care for the child. However, if after the birth of the child it turns out that he suffers from a genetic disease, for example Down syndrome, then the parents' lives are affected in a different way than they expected. were waiting. Even if financial support as well as support from family caregivers is available, parents' lives will still be heavily influenced. Not only is the intensity of care these children need increasing, but also the duration for which they need it. While most children become independent as they grow up, several genetic disorders significantly limit or even prevent affected individuals from becoming independent from their parents. Through prenatal DNA sequencing, a child's genetic disorders can be identified in the early stages of pregnancy. Having this information would allow parents to make a more informed decision.informed about whether they have the capacity to care for their child. Allowing parents to have this information will ensure that sufficient care is provided to the child, making their life better than it would have been without that care. Besides the child's life, that of the parents is also affected. Parents will have fewer (unexpected) compromises to make in their lives. Although most parents will do this willingly, they may find themselves in a situation where they are forced to make unexpected life changes in order to provide adequate care for their child. Additionally, having a child with a genetic disease causes a lot of stress for parents. If the parents had known about the genetic condition at an early stage of pregnancy, they could have made an informed decision about whether or not to continue the pregnancy. Less knowledge of the genetic state of the unborn child will allow parents who consider themselves incapable of providing sufficient care to terminate the pregnancy. Parents have the right to make this informed decision and the technology that allows them to do so is therefore morally permissible. The above argument indicates that information obtained through the use of this technology can be used by parents to make an informed decision about whether they will have the capacity to care for the child. Since this relies on an assumption about the amount of care the child would need, it is not morally permissible because not all children with Down syndrome need the same care. People tend to take worst-case scenarios on which to base their decisions when deciding issues like the one described in this argument. Another objection to this argument is that every child should have equal opportunities and that the decision as to whether a child fits their parents' lifestyle should not be based on genetic discrepancies, as this gives parents the option to discriminate and use other genetic information to choose. a child who fits their ideas of the perfect child. This idea was also published by all participants in the survey conducted in the following document. They agreed that unconditional acceptance of children is the most laudable approach. Another objection raised in this article is the obsession with physical perfection in society. This approach could put even greater social pressure on people with disabilities in the future, because it is not one hundred percent accurate and does not mean that no children with disabilities will be born in the future. This type of decision-making based on possibly incorrect information and assumptions about a child's life should therefore not be allowed. Child welfare An argument for this technology based on the welfare of the child and parents will be considered. Suppose a woman is pregnant and the test results show that the child has a genetic disease. The birth might be less favorable due to the fact that the child might suffer and have a poor quality of life due to their disabilities. Examining this situation from the perspective of well-being hedonism, according to which well-being depends solely on the presence of happiness/pleasure and the absence of pain/suffering, could lead to the conclusion that in this situation , it would be more favorable if the child is not born, so this would promote the greatest total well-being in this situation. Under these conditions, the information provided by the prenatal test may be important for the outcome of this scenario and an argument can be concluded that the information provided by this technology has the potential to make informed decisions leading to a 1095-5054.

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch