Ethics
Trisomy 18 comes with multiple ethical choices that start at prenatal screening and continue right through pregnancy and birth. The first is diagnostic testing. Diagnostic testing is an ethical issue because it can lead to miscarriage. From this, the choice between early detection with a higher risk of miscarriage (CVS) or a slightly later detection with a smaller (however, still present) risk of miscarriage (Amniocentesis) must be weighed up. These tests however can give the parents time to prepare for miscarriage, stillbirth, or a child who will never make it to adult hood.
This will also give the parents time to consider another ethical and moral issue, which is Abortion. As some parents believe they will not be able to cope with the thought of having a child that will most likely not make it to birth, let alone their 1st birthday, they may choose to have an abortion. The parents may also be unable to afford to take care of a child with a disability such as Edwards Syndrome if it were to live through adolescence. This to may also persuade parents into having an abortion.
Some parents may also choose to abort on the basis of Quality over Quantity. This means that instead of the child suffering through birth, and whatever short life they have, the baby is instead aborted. This is done instead of giving birth because the symptoms of Edwards Syndrome would be too much to put the child through. This would also be done to prevent the emotional trauma of losing your baby/child later on, which would not only affect you, but also your friends and family.
Other things that may have to be taken into consideration are Social and Societal implications that may be contributed to early detection.
This will also give the parents time to consider another ethical and moral issue, which is Abortion. As some parents believe they will not be able to cope with the thought of having a child that will most likely not make it to birth, let alone their 1st birthday, they may choose to have an abortion. The parents may also be unable to afford to take care of a child with a disability such as Edwards Syndrome if it were to live through adolescence. This to may also persuade parents into having an abortion.
Some parents may also choose to abort on the basis of Quality over Quantity. This means that instead of the child suffering through birth, and whatever short life they have, the baby is instead aborted. This is done instead of giving birth because the symptoms of Edwards Syndrome would be too much to put the child through. This would also be done to prevent the emotional trauma of losing your baby/child later on, which would not only affect you, but also your friends and family.
Other things that may have to be taken into consideration are Social and Societal implications that may be contributed to early detection.
General Ethics for Disease
Because of diseases and the inability for some people to be unaccepting of disease and disability, the topic of disease eradication can come up. This means that in order to have a planet with no illness (major genetic disorders), those who have things that can be passed down to younger generations should be made unable to reproduce, and that babies that have been screened and have genetic disorders should be aborted.
Although this fantasy would eradicate most diseases, some would be impossible to eradicate. This is also a very unethical idea. Since it would involve the abortion of many babies and would also restrict people of their basic human rights. Although there would be less suffering, and eventually no more major genetic diseases, it would be impossible to completely eradicate Autosomal Defects. Since things like Edwards Syndrome and Down Syndrome and not due to pre-exposure to the disease, it cannot be eradicated.
Since some diseases are accidental (trisomy 18 where one of the sex cells accidentally ends up with 24 chromosomes instead of 23) caused, they would never be truly eradicated. These diseases can actually be good for the community and society. Although it can sometimes be horrible for a person who is suffering from diseases like these, and their families, it can help out the local community and society. If a person in a small community is suffering with something like this, it can bring the community closer together in order to help the sufferer and their family with not only coping, but also help generally to make things easier for the person affected.
Some people may also say that a person with a disability may hinder society, however, the complete opposite is true. While a person with a disability may need your help from time to time, they can help out the general society and economy. This is because as they are disabled, they may need more help than someone who is unaffected. This not only creates jobs for carers and gives people a way to put a roof over their heads and food on the table. It can also help to drive the economy as they may need to spend more money on medication or apparatus that they may need in order to survive.
From this, it can be seen that eradication of disease is not a good thing. Not only could affect the economy, and the local community, but the sheer unethical treatment of people and unborn babies is a horrible thing. Not only could the abortions that would come from disease eradication be a horrible unethical thing to do, it could also physically, mentally, and emotionally scar the mother. Any physical scaring that may be caused could also affect a mother in a way that could make any further conception difficult or even impossible.
Although this fantasy would eradicate most diseases, some would be impossible to eradicate. This is also a very unethical idea. Since it would involve the abortion of many babies and would also restrict people of their basic human rights. Although there would be less suffering, and eventually no more major genetic diseases, it would be impossible to completely eradicate Autosomal Defects. Since things like Edwards Syndrome and Down Syndrome and not due to pre-exposure to the disease, it cannot be eradicated.
Since some diseases are accidental (trisomy 18 where one of the sex cells accidentally ends up with 24 chromosomes instead of 23) caused, they would never be truly eradicated. These diseases can actually be good for the community and society. Although it can sometimes be horrible for a person who is suffering from diseases like these, and their families, it can help out the local community and society. If a person in a small community is suffering with something like this, it can bring the community closer together in order to help the sufferer and their family with not only coping, but also help generally to make things easier for the person affected.
Some people may also say that a person with a disability may hinder society, however, the complete opposite is true. While a person with a disability may need your help from time to time, they can help out the general society and economy. This is because as they are disabled, they may need more help than someone who is unaffected. This not only creates jobs for carers and gives people a way to put a roof over their heads and food on the table. It can also help to drive the economy as they may need to spend more money on medication or apparatus that they may need in order to survive.
From this, it can be seen that eradication of disease is not a good thing. Not only could affect the economy, and the local community, but the sheer unethical treatment of people and unborn babies is a horrible thing. Not only could the abortions that would come from disease eradication be a horrible unethical thing to do, it could also physically, mentally, and emotionally scar the mother. Any physical scaring that may be caused could also affect a mother in a way that could make any further conception difficult or even impossible.