[Genetic cancer syndromes and reproductive choice: dialogue between parents and politicians on preimplantation genetic diagnosis]

Abstract

Genetic cancer syndromes have identical clinical severity, limited therapeutic options, reduced life expectancy, and risks of genetic transmission, as do other genetic or congenital diseases for which prenatal genetic diagnosis or preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is allowed in the Netherlands. That was implied in the certification of one Dutch PGD centre at Maastricht University Hospital by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport in 2003. A report by the Health Council of the Netherlands in 2006 confirmed this view with scientific and ethical evaluation. However, in 2006 the State Secretary for Health strongly objected to PGD for cancer, and disease risks of 50-100% for gene carriers, i.e. for highly, but not always fully penetrant genes. In 2006, the Maastricht centre discontinued PGD for cancer and couples were referred to other countries; prenatal genetic diagnosis remained available, however. On 26 May 2008, the present State Secretary proposed to parliament that the Health Council of the Netherlands report from 2006 be followed. This once again clashed with the fears of some Christian parties for a slippery slope and embryo selection for 'only a risk and not certainty of disease'. Yet no firm evidence for the existence of such a slope has been found. The Dutch framework for handling the ethical and medical evaluation of new reproductive and genetic technologies by the Health Council of the Netherlands Advisory Committees, professional and patient organisations, and the Ministry, has functioned for over 30 years without leading to any wrongdoing. There is no actual need for a new government body to license genetic tests on a case-by-case or per disease basis