TAMTAM
Mar 30, 2009
Writing Feedback / "PGD method" - feetback on introduction of short academic essay [12]
Hello, and thank you so much for your remarks ... @EF_Sean: I have to follow the standarts of my teacher and he wants us to write an essay with the following structure: Intro, 1st paragraph (my view), 2nd paragraph (opposing view), 3rd paragraph (my view again), Conclusion - therefore I think I can't really add a third "big" extra- point of my position even If I like your thought ... Anyway. I didn't really think about posting my whole essay because I thought it woule be too much. But I felt encouraged by your words so here it is: (It is somehow the third draft [and I hope close to the final one] already as I had some discussions with fellow students in the last week. Still I am very keen to hear what you think ... Thank you ...
Should the German government stick to its ban on the PGD method?
Imagine a world without incurable diseases, a world without serious suffering, a world where parents are not burdened with a chronically ill or disabled child. This is an alluring idea of medical science and scientists in many countries do research in order to come closer to this vision. Nowadays, modern society understands about avoidable risk factors that support the outbreak of certain diseases, such as smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol whilst pregnant; similarly, we have discovered that mutations of human genes can cause all kinds of physical and mental illnesses. Since the early Nineties, so called preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) enables us to examine certain characteristics of fertilised egg cells outside the uterus and to destroy abnormal embryos before a pregnancy has even started. However, in Germany the government should stick to its ban of the PGD method because this is by no means a morally unproblematic method of family planning.
PGD is resulting in contempt for human life. When undertaking the embryo screening it is essential to extract a surplus of human ovums from the ovaries and to fertilise them to guarantee a certain success rate of the method. But usually a maximum of 3 to 4 embryos are chosen for implantation into the uterus; the implantation of more than that is linked to significant health risks for the pregnant woman. The destruction of potential life, and even of healthy life, is apparently accepted, which diminishes the individual worthiness and uniqueness of each embryo. Furthermore, the selection of embryos for implantation mandates the selection of healthy ones and the rejection of those that are (potentially) defective. Such a procedure discriminates against the disabled because they are classified as "unworthy of life" - a morally problematic way of thinking that the Holocaust should have taught us to avoid.
For a family already coping with a child who has a genetic defect (e.g. Down's syndrome) or who is at risk of an inherited disorder (e.g. Huntington's chorea) the PGD method provides a comparatively safe way of having children that are not affected by these illnesses. Embryo- screening supports the parents to start a family and eliminates the fear that offspring may be disabled; heredopathy need not necessarily mean couples must forego having children just to be on the safe side. Thus, PGD is just a logical and responsible way to have a healthy baby with a promising future, which families in Germany should also be able to profit from.
Favouring embryos considered healthy (will) lead to the creation of "designer babies". Developments in genetic research in the recent past prove the definition of "disease" turns out to be a very subjective one. In the UK the first female breast cancer gene- free baby was already born in December 08, although breast cancer has an uncertain risk of development and can often be treated successfully. In the U.S. parents even select the sex of an embryo in the absence of any (sex- linked) disease, just for purpose of "family balance". At this point a moral line has been crossed. However, simply banning PGD, as we have done in Germany, can prevent us from increasingly exhausting medical possibilities so that the lines between what is a serious health problem, what is a mild or treatable disease and what is purely a trait or genetic characteristic don't blur any further.
Are children at risk of being viewed as products of design rather than wondrous creations in the long term? For sure this question cannot be answered "yes", but nor can the answer be "no", which should make us think. PGD places society atop a slippery slope that might lead to genetic enhancement and human control of evolution. Germany, being a modern state, has the chance to function as role model by sticking to the ban of the PGD method, demonstrating that "being different" is part of mankind and should be accepted naturally.
Hello, and thank you so much for your remarks ... @EF_Sean: I have to follow the standarts of my teacher and he wants us to write an essay with the following structure: Intro, 1st paragraph (my view), 2nd paragraph (opposing view), 3rd paragraph (my view again), Conclusion - therefore I think I can't really add a third "big" extra- point of my position even If I like your thought ... Anyway. I didn't really think about posting my whole essay because I thought it woule be too much. But I felt encouraged by your words so here it is: (It is somehow the third draft [and I hope close to the final one] already as I had some discussions with fellow students in the last week. Still I am very keen to hear what you think ... Thank you ...
Should the German government stick to its ban on the PGD method?
Imagine a world without incurable diseases, a world without serious suffering, a world where parents are not burdened with a chronically ill or disabled child. This is an alluring idea of medical science and scientists in many countries do research in order to come closer to this vision. Nowadays, modern society understands about avoidable risk factors that support the outbreak of certain diseases, such as smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol whilst pregnant; similarly, we have discovered that mutations of human genes can cause all kinds of physical and mental illnesses. Since the early Nineties, so called preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) enables us to examine certain characteristics of fertilised egg cells outside the uterus and to destroy abnormal embryos before a pregnancy has even started. However, in Germany the government should stick to its ban of the PGD method because this is by no means a morally unproblematic method of family planning.
PGD is resulting in contempt for human life. When undertaking the embryo screening it is essential to extract a surplus of human ovums from the ovaries and to fertilise them to guarantee a certain success rate of the method. But usually a maximum of 3 to 4 embryos are chosen for implantation into the uterus; the implantation of more than that is linked to significant health risks for the pregnant woman. The destruction of potential life, and even of healthy life, is apparently accepted, which diminishes the individual worthiness and uniqueness of each embryo. Furthermore, the selection of embryos for implantation mandates the selection of healthy ones and the rejection of those that are (potentially) defective. Such a procedure discriminates against the disabled because they are classified as "unworthy of life" - a morally problematic way of thinking that the Holocaust should have taught us to avoid.
For a family already coping with a child who has a genetic defect (e.g. Down's syndrome) or who is at risk of an inherited disorder (e.g. Huntington's chorea) the PGD method provides a comparatively safe way of having children that are not affected by these illnesses. Embryo- screening supports the parents to start a family and eliminates the fear that offspring may be disabled; heredopathy need not necessarily mean couples must forego having children just to be on the safe side. Thus, PGD is just a logical and responsible way to have a healthy baby with a promising future, which families in Germany should also be able to profit from.
Favouring embryos considered healthy (will) lead to the creation of "designer babies". Developments in genetic research in the recent past prove the definition of "disease" turns out to be a very subjective one. In the UK the first female breast cancer gene- free baby was already born in December 08, although breast cancer has an uncertain risk of development and can often be treated successfully. In the U.S. parents even select the sex of an embryo in the absence of any (sex- linked) disease, just for purpose of "family balance". At this point a moral line has been crossed. However, simply banning PGD, as we have done in Germany, can prevent us from increasingly exhausting medical possibilities so that the lines between what is a serious health problem, what is a mild or treatable disease and what is purely a trait or genetic characteristic don't blur any further.
Are children at risk of being viewed as products of design rather than wondrous creations in the long term? For sure this question cannot be answered "yes", but nor can the answer be "no", which should make us think. PGD places society atop a slippery slope that might lead to genetic enhancement and human control of evolution. Germany, being a modern state, has the chance to function as role model by sticking to the ban of the PGD method, demonstrating that "being different" is part of mankind and should be accepted naturally.
