click above to browse
through
the current issue
Want to see your child's
work in print? The winner
will receive a �25 book voucher.
Email:
[email protected]
GENETIC SCREENING: HOPES AND CAUTIONS
The BBC reported on the birth of the first baby in the
UK tested before conception for a genetic form of
breast cancer: “The embryo was screened for the
altered BRCA1 gene, which would have meant the
girl had an 80% chance of developing breast
cancer,” as “women in three generations of the
husband’s family have been diagnosed with the
disease in their 20s.”
The process involves the testing of a cell taken from
the embryo when it is about 3 days old, before
“conception” – when the embryo is implanted in
the womb. Any embryos that show a genetic profile
that might cause future problems are discarded.
A mutated BRCA1 gene could potentially give an
increased chance of breast cancer and a 50%
chance of ovarian cancer later in life, although
neither would have been inevitable.
Although well-established, this process, called
Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has been
given the go-ahead in respect of susceptibility genes
like BRCA1 by the Human Fertilisation and
Embryology Authority.
The ethics debate continues in respect of the future
potential of pre-screening for autism. The Guardian
reports on new research which suggests that high
levels of testosterone in pregnant mothers’ amniotic
fluid could be linked to “autistic traits”.
“High levels of testosterone in pregnant
mothers’ amniotic fluid could be linked
to autistic traits”
The Cambridge University study looked at 235
children aged between eight and 10, whose mothers
had had tests analysing the amniotic fluid around the
foetus when pregnant. None of these children were
autistic, but those exposed to higher testosterone
levels showed higher levels of “autistic traits,” such
as poor verbal and social skills.
In response to the calls for pre-natal testing, the
NHS Behind the Headlines said: “Even if such a test
were possible, it is important to note that this would
be a screening test and not a definitive diagnostic
test, i.e. it would identify foetuses more or less likely
to develop autism rather than identify those who
would definitely go on to develop autism.
Screening tests are rarely 100% accurate, and the
many ethical issues surrounding prenatal screening
for risk of autism would need to be debated before
any test could be offered. Also, there are currently
no ways to prevent a child from developing autism.
Therefore, it is unclear whether identifying children
at greater risk of autism would benefit the child or
the parents.”
The moral debate will continue with the question
arising: “If we screen out autism might we deny the
world of a future genius?”
|