Genetic Screening Genetic screening, also known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), is a newly emerging technology that has brought with it much controversy. PGD involves the in vitro fertilization of an embryo. The embryos are allowed to develop to a 6 to 10 cell stage, at which point one of the embryonic cells is removed from each embryo and the cellular DNA is analyzed for chromosomal abnormalities or genetic mutations (Botkin, 1998). In doing this, it can be determined which embryos will be most likely to implant and germinate successfully in the uterus. PGD is a complicated, technologically sophisticated process. It is a union of in vetro fertilization technology and molecular biology (Botkin, 1998).
Though it has numerous positive attributes, there are equally as many negative ones. In fact, this issue is one that has recently become the subject of many heated debates. Proponents for the use of PGD assert that this test allows for parents with fertility problems to maximize their opportunity for conception and birth. Their adversaries argue that this process is morally questionable, and though it is seen as safe alternative to abortion couples can experience the same psychological effects as if they were dealing with an actual abortion (Botkin, 1998). Obviously, this is an issue that does not have one distinct answer. Each opposing side has raised some poignant arguments.
Those who are in favor of PGD generally use the arguments that it allows for the transmission of human genetic diseases to be reduced (McClure and Tasca, 1998). Before the usage of PGD the only other way to determine the existence of genetic diseases was by the use of prenatal diagnosis in the form of amniocentesis or chronic villus sampling (CVS). Currently, CVS can only be performed in the ninth to eleventh week of pregnancy, and amniocentesis can be performed in fifteenth to eighteenth week (McClure and Tasca, 1998). At this point, the fetus is developing within the uterus. Discovery of any abnormalities would pose the parents of the fetus with a difficult decision. They either continue a pregnancy that will result in a genetically defected child or abort the fetus. This is where PGD allows for what some would say an easier option. Because PGD is a pre- pregnancy test, abnormalities can be detected prior to the embryo ever being inserted into the mother. Currently, there are several diseases that PGD can detect such as Cystic Fibrosis, Tay-Sachs disease, Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, Fragile X Syndrome, and Down Syndrome (McClure and Tasca, 1998).
These are only a few of the diseases that can be detected but as the knowledge concerning human DNA increases there will be more detectable diseases. In addition to disease detection, PGD can also detect the gender of an embryo which can enable the determination of the existence of sex-linked disease or a sex chromosome imbalance (McClure and Tasca, 1998). Another of PGDs benefits is its ability to assist women over the age of thirty-five to successfully conceive. From this age group 50 percent of the embryos are chromosomally abnormal (McClure and Tasca, 1998). For these women, PGD drastically increases the odds for a successful pregnancy while the odds for miscarriage are reduced (McClure and Tasca, 1998). PGD also has promising outlook in cancer research. In the same manner that PGD detects single gene defects in embryo tests, it could do the same for polygenic diseases such as cancer (Yates, 1996). Experiments with genetic screening have been done concerning Tay-Sachs disease .The outcome of this research indicated that PGD has the potential to be extremely beneficial. Tay-Sachs disease affects 1 in 3600 Ashkensasi Jews, couples who were at risk for transmission of this disease to their offspring were genetically screened ( Robbers, 1990) . As a result of the screening, the number of children who were born with Tay-Sachs disease dropped from 50 in 100 in 1970 to 13 in 100 in 1980 ( Roberts, 1990).
Due to the positive results from genetic screening, it is becoming somewhat more popular and accepted. In a survey done by Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, a group of people were surveyed to determine their likelihood to undergo genetic screening given their family history concerning colon cancer (Henderson, 1999). Those who had a significant family history of colon cancer as well as those who did not were eager to undergo gene testing (Henderson, 1999). At this point, genetic screening has begun with a good track record. Most of those who have used it or heard about it are positive about its real or anticipated results. PGD seems to be a promising medical procedure, but as always with new things there are doubters and skeptics. One of the many negative statements that the adversaries of PGD use is that it may cause women the same psychological effects as she would experience with an abortion.
The embryos that are found to have abnormalities are usually destroyed just as a fetus would be destroyed. Currently, there has been no research concerning the psychological reactions to PGD so this is a real concern. The techniques used for PGD requires that several embryos be used. In a recent report, twelve couples utilized PGD to screen for cystic fibrosis. The couples produced 137 embryos, of which 26 were transferred to a woman’s uterus and 5 births resulted (Botkin, 1998).
The loss of prenatal life was greater through PGD than would have resulted had the twelve couples used traditional prenatal diagnosis and selective termination (Botkin, 1998). For most couples, two cycles of egg retrieval, testing, and implantation usually are required to establish a successful pregnancy (Botkin, 1998). For any individual couple, PGD requires several months of time, multiple drugs, invasive procedures, and specialists at a center for reproductive medicine(Botkin, 1998). Once a pregnancy is established, traditional prenatal diagnosis is still recommended to check the process (Botkin, 1998).This complicated process is also an expensive one. Couples who choose to use PGD would have to be willing to spend in excess of 43,000 dollars because as of now 85 percent of the costs of in vitro fertilization are not covered by insurance companies (Botkin, 1998).
This figure does not include the PGD procedure, couples would be spending a large amount of money to use these techniques. For women over thirty-five the usage of PGD would not only be expensive but very risky. These women would only have approximately a 5 percent chance to become impregnated using PGD and in vitro fertilization (Botkin, 1998). With the procedure being so expensive, the combination of PGD and in vitro fertilization will only be used by a select few. The users will be limited to couples who can afford this expensive procedure, and couples who are selected by researchers to have the process institutionally funded. Not only is the process expensive, but it also has the potential to be unreliable.
As previously mentioned, PGD is still a new medical discovery, there is still an element of risk involved in its usage. The major risk is misdiagnosis. There is a strong possibility for technical error in this process. The entire procedure, including PGD and in vitro fertilization, involves six separate technologies (McClure and Tasca 1998). When the embyros cells are actually removed there is a chance that chromosomal abnormalities may not show up even if they exist.
The embryos are in such a primordial state that all of the cells may not yet have the abnormality. Potentially, an abnormal embryo may be implanted in the uterus. Even after usage of PGD and in vitro fertilization the percentages of the frequency of babies born with birth defects among those who use it and the general population is 3 percent for both groups(McClure and Tasca 1998). Aside from these problems there is also the issue of the regulation of genetic screening. Many people fear that in the future genetic screening will not only be used to prevent children being born with chromosomal abnormalities but also that it may be used for physical and psychological selection of embryos. Obviously, there are going to be problems with any new medical procedure.
PGD is still in its infancy, with time and research there will still be problems, but hopefully they can be decreased. The usage of PGD is bound to be surrounded by controversy. Anything that can potentially involve genetic selection is naturally of concern to our society. The important thing to do is exercise sound decision making concerning its use. There is no doubt that there are risks in using PGD but there are risks in using any medical procedure. Research indicates that some couples have had success in using PGD and in vetro fertilization while others have not. By their very nature, PGD and in vetro fertilization are tests that have a natural probability of not succeeding.
The key to using these procedures in knowledge. Couples need to know the advantages as well as the disadvantages that go along with these procedures. Concerning the matter of genetic selection, there needs to be some strict regulation. If PGD is used for the wrong reasons there could be serious damage done to our society. After we take away all of the medical jargon, the fact is that our society needs to exercise positive decision making techniques to maximize the benefits of this new medical breakthrough. Bibliography References Cited Botkin, J.
(1998). Ethical issues and practical problems in preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics, 26, 17-28. Henderson, C. (1999, May).
People lean toward genetic testing, risk aside. Cancer Weekly Plus. McClure, M. & Tasca, R. The emerging technology and application of preimplantation genetic diagnosis.
Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics,26, 7-16. Roberts, Leslie. One worked: the other didnt. Science, 247, 18. Yates, John. Medical genetics.
British Medical Journal. 312, 1021-1026. Social Issues Essays.