bioethicists normally seem free-wheeling types who encourage people to create
the kind of children they want. But a paper given by a Dutch bioethicist
suggests that utilitarians, too, have a Puritanical streak. It turns out that
they should only create healthy eugenically-fit children.
In a paper
about the ethics of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis at a European Society of
Human Reproduction and Embryology conference in Barcelona, Wybo Dondorp
suggested that it was probably immoral to allow parents who wanted a “better”
child to backtrack and settle for a defective child. And if parents ask,
doctors should be resolute in telling them No.
parents typically ask fertility clinics to screen their embryos for a gene
which causes a genetic disease. But sometimes no such embryos are found. In
this case, says Dr Dondorp, doctors should refuse to transfer affected embryos,
on the principle that they have a professional responsibility to do no harm.
“An example is an embryo that is homozygous for cystic fibrosis, where the
child will definitely have the disease. In such cases,” he says, “it is
inconceivable that doctors would agree to transfer these embryos as it would be
at odds with their professional responsibilities."
genes for late onset diseases like breast cancer which will only strike after
35 or 40 years, if ever? Dr Dondorp says that the parents should naturally have
some say in the matter -- but not much. The welfare of a future child is far
too important a decision to be left up to parents. It should be left in the hands
of eugenicist professionals. ~ ESHRE,