Non invasive prenatal testing for single gene disorders:Exploring the ethics

Non-invasive prenatal testing for single gene disorders is now clearly on the horizon. This new technology offers obvious clinical benefits such as safe testing early in pregnancy. Before widespread implementation, it is important to consider the possible ethical implications. Four hypothetical scenarios are presented that highlight how ethical ideals of respect for autonomy, privacy and fairness may come into play when offering non-invasive prenatal testing for single gene disorders. The first scenario illustrates the moral case for using these tests for ‘information only', identifying a potential conflict between larger numbers of women seeking the benefits of the test and the wider social impact of funding tests that do not offer immediate clinical benefit. The second scenario shows how the simplicity and safety of non-invasive prenatal testing could lead to more autonomous decision-making and, conversely, how this could also lead to increased pressure on women to take up testing. In the third scenario we show how, unless strong safeguards are put in place, offering non-invasive prenatal testing could be subject to routinisation with informed consent undermined and that woman who are newly diagnosed as carriers may be particularly vulnerable. The final scenario introduces the possibility of a conflict of the moral rights of a woman and her partner through testing for single gene disorders. This analysis informs our understanding of the potential impacts of non-invasive prenatal testing for single gene disorders on clinical practice and has implications for future policy and guidelines for prenatal care

Engendering harm: a critique of sex selection for 'family balancing'

The most benign rationale for sex-selection is deemed to be “family balancing.” On this view, provided the sex-distribution of an existing offspring group is “unbalanced,” one may legitimately use reproductive technologies to select the sex of the next child. I present four novel concerns with granting “family balancing” as a justification for sex-selection: (a) families or family subsets should not be subject to medicalization; (b) sex selection for “family balancing” entrenches heteronormativity, inflicting harm in at least three specific ways; (c) the logic of affirmative action is appropriated; (d) the moral mandate of reproductive autonomy is misused. I conclude that the harms caused by “family balancing” are sufficiently substantive to over-ride any claim arising from a supposed right to sex selection as an instantiation of procreative autonomy

Medical genetics in developing countries in the Asia-Pacific region: challenges and opportunities

Advances in genetic and genomic technology changed health-care services rapidly in low and middle income countries (LMICs) in the Asia-Pacific region. While genetic services were initially focused on population-based disease prevention strategies, they have evolved into clinic-based and therapeutics-oriented service. Many LMICs struggled with these noncommunicable diseases and were unprepared for the needs of a clinical genetic service. The emergence of a middle class population, the lack of regulatory oversight, and weak capacity-building in medical genetics expertise and genetic counseling services led to a range of genetic services of variable quality with minimal ethical oversight. Some of the current shortcomings faced include the lack of awareness of cultural values in genetic health care, the variable stages of socioeconomic development and educational background that led to increased demand and abuse of genetics, the role of women in society and the crisis of gender selection, the lack of preventive and care services for genetic and birth defects, the issues of gene ethics in medicine, and the lack of understanding of some religious controversies. These challenges provide opportunities for both developing and developed nations to work together to reduce the inequalities and to ensure a caring, inclusive, ethical, and cost-effective genetic service in the region

Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethical issues explored

This paper explores the ethical implications of introducing non-invasive prenatal diagnostic tests (NIPD tests) in prenatal screening for foetal abnormalities. NIPD tests are easy and safe and can be performed early in pregnancy. Precisely because of these features, it is feared that informed consent may become more difficult, that both testing and selective abortion will become ‘normalized', and that there will be a trend towards accepting testing for minor abnormalities and non-medical traits as well. In our view, however, the real moral challenge of NIPD testing consists in the possibility of linking up a technique with these features (easy, safe and early) with new genomic technologies that allow prenatal diagnostic testing for a much broader range of abnormalities than is the case in current procedures. An increase in uptake and more selective abortions need not in itself be taken to signal a thoughtless acceptance of these procedures. However, combining this with considerably enlarging the scope of NIPD testing will indeed make informed consent more difficult and challenge the notion of prenatal screening as serving reproductive autonomy. If broad NIPD testing includes later-onset diseases, the ‘right not to know' of the future child will become a new issue in the debate about prenatal screening. With regard to the controversial issue of selective abortion, it may make a morally relevant difference that after NIPD testing, abortion can be done early. A lower moral status may be attributed to the foetus at that moment, given the dominant opinion that the moral status of the foetus progressively increases with its development