This week's BioNews includes news from the United States of the first children born as a result of IVF and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for sickle cell disease. Because of PGD, the couple concerned was able to start a pregnancy knowing that it was free of the genetic fault which causes sickle cell disease.
While some working in the sickle cell field have been positive about the new option for parents at risk of having an affected child, others are more worried about the effects that such a treatment could have on sufferers. Linda Anderson, president of the Sickle Cell Disease Association of America, welcomed the development. 'Any time there is an opportunity to have these kinds of breakthroughs, particularly to help those of child-bearing age make informed decisions about childbirth, I think it is miraculous.'
Anderson's excitement, however, is not shared by all in her field. Dr Oswaldo Castro, director of the Sickle Cell Disease Center, Howard University in Washington, works with adults suffering from the disease. He explained: 'It's difficult for me to make a judgement and say "well, this one should never have been born"'. For him, PGD sends a message to people who already have the disease that their lives are not worth living.
On the face of it, Castro's concerns do seem to be reasonable. People with sickle cell disease do not have unbearable lives and their condition certainly does not mean that they should be left to die. Such an attitude towards living people would be unthinkable. But would a similar attitude towards an embryo or a fetus be equally unthinkable?
It depends, of course, on what you consider embryos and fetuses to be. Those who consider all human life to be equally important from the moment of conception to the moment of death are bound to abhor PGD regardless of the reason for which it is being performed. Indeed, such people would oppose the creation of embryos outside the human body in the first place.
But those of us who don't feel that all human life is of equal importance and maintain that children and adults do matter more than embryos or fetuses, should reject Castro's concerns about PGD. Destroying an embryo because it has the sickle cell gene is not the same as killing a child or an adult with sickle cell disease.
When the American couple in question rejected the sickle cell embryos in favour of those free from the disease, they were certainly not implying that sickle cell sufferers are better off dead. I imagine their thought was that if they could prevent their children suffering from such a debilitating condition, it would be a wonderful thing. Should we really be condemning such an aspiration?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.