The Effect of Genomic Testing on Families and Individuals Genetic testing has given scientists and doctors much knowledge into the way disease processes work and has improved the efficacy of treating them. While there are many positive outcomes with genetic testing, there are also some negative ways families and individuals can be impacted. Some ethical dilemmas involving family and genetic testing are: should newborn testing be mandatory or voluntary, do parents have the right to make the decision to have his/her child get genetic testing in adolescent and adult onset conditions, and is the risk to benefit ratio balanced with these tests (Holaday, 2004). In newborn genetic screening the main issue is whether it should be a voluntary …show more content…
Testing a high-risk infant or child can benefit them in many ways. According to Ross, Robertson, and Savulescu, “Potential benefits to the child include increased self knowledge that allows better psychosocial adjustment, decreased anxiety and uncertainty about the future, the elimination of potential environmental risk factors, and more openness about genetic conditions within the family” (as cited in Holaday, 2010). The family can mentally and physically prepare for the condition, and this can benefit both the child and family in the future. In contrast, a child with positive test results may have a negative reaction. There may be reduced self-esteem and other psychological problems, a feeling of altered treatment from parents in the form of restrictions,favoritism, or neglect (McGovern, Rosen, Wallenstein, …show more content…
One of the criteria for adult onset testing is that the patient be old enough to fully understand what the test is, the risks, and be able to participate in making decisions with his/her parents and the healthcare team. The ethical debate lies with the potential psychosocial side effects that may occur that were also an issue with genetic testing of conditions with late childhood/adolescent onset (Holaday, 2010). An example of a condition with late adult onset is Huntington’s Disease. There has been much controversy with testing this certain condition being there is no treatment available. A study was conducted for a group of twenty-one people that were tested positive for Huntington’s Disease. They were asked to discuss their reaction to learning of Huntington’s Disease in the family and age testing, the time that one must live with this knowledge, and making reproductive decisions. The overall attitudes of participants regardless of age was accepting to their results. The younger participants stated the test either had a positive or little to no effect on his/her lives, and helped with the decision to not reproduce. Follow up studies would need to be conducted in order to see if the participants still felt this way in the future (Chapman,
It can result in attachment difficulties, trauma, physical health problems and learning
One major long term effect that can affect them for the rest of their life is poor social relationships. This means that the children
Through DNA testing we can now see which diseases we will likely pass down to our children. Although this ability can be life-saving in the aspect it can be used to prevent diseases in children, it also can affect the parents’ desires
Special attention needs to be given to health and education to ensure the child is healthy in all aspects of their life and their education is paramount to ensuring confidence and growth so they can become healthy confident adults and can go out into the world armed with a good education. If not the child could become withdrawn, depressed, and have low self-esteem which can bring its own
It is never ethical for patients to be intimidated or forced into undergoing certain testing. I believe it is the patient’s decision whether to undergo genetic testing and be informed of the results. In my opinion, a lack of genetic counselors compromises the ethics of genetic testing as patients are more vulnerable to being pressured into doing tests or receiving results they never wished to receive. Therefore, I believe genetic testing is done in a more ethical way when genetic counselors are available as counselors operate by listening to patient requests, only providing information of testing he/she wishes to undergo, and only presenting and helping patients understand the requested results. Even the author of Proverbs 11:14 (English Standard Version) points out the ethical importance of counselors by declaring, “[w]here there is no guidance, a people falls, but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.”
People can’t have a life without surprises. There is always going to be something that comes up. The woman from the above example may get a kid free of the Alzheimer’s gene, but that same child could get cancer or die in an accident. Trying to have a risk free life is not realistic.
DNA was the only thing that contributed to a little girl's death one friday night, when she collapsed from a heart attack suddenly. The doctor said it was simply in her genes, but what does that really mean? Certain mutations and differences can transpire in someone's genes which causes particular genetic diseases and variances to occur. By taking samples of a person's DNA, which is what our genes consist of, doctors can determine mutations in genes that can impact specific traits and illnesses. While this is very intriguing to me, I wanted to understand how accurate genetic testing is, and how it affects people's everyday lives.
This mindset reduced the amount of blame that the public placed on the diagnosed for their condition; however, at the same it increased their fear of them. By combining the genetic model with the biological, this problem was hopefully thought to slowly dwindle down. This is so because the biological model places emphasis on what is occurring in the brain of someone who is diagnosed (Rusch pg 331). This reduced the fearfulness of the condition as the public was able to understand what was happening and why. The combination of these two models created an effective holistic model that did help reduce the stigma.
After reading the articles,”Why We Should Think Twice About Giving Genetic Tests to Our Kids” ,by Michael White, and “Genetic Testing for Kids:Is It a Good Idea?”, by Bonnie Rochman, parents should not give these tests to their children. If the children did take the test the result would outway the benefits, they would have anxiety, and the testing doesn’t always work. One main reason that a child should not the test is ,they could have anxiety for the rest of their lives. If a child took the genetic test they could learn they have a deadly disease they don’t know about yet.
Scientist do not know the exact cause of Alzheimer’s but they do know genes have some logic to the cause. According to researchers, genetic testing may be helpful when wanting to see the chances of developing Alzheimer's. Also, when someone takes a genetic test, doctors find it easier to plan for the future (Alzheimer’s Association, 2016). Despite the fact that there are an abundance of pros on getting genetically tested for Alzheimer's, a large number of doctors are against the concept of getting tested.
According to “The Pros and Cons of a Predictive Alzheimer’s Test” by Esther Heerema, “A person who knows he has the disease may focus on every little memory slip and lose confidence in his own abilities to live independently and make decisions.” Others say that if the patient is told of his Alzheimer’s he will be able to prepare emotionally and physically for the change. If a patient is not informed of having Alzheimer’s, he can avoid losing confidence in their memories and live the rest of his life without worrying about when the Alzheimer’s is going to take over. Alzheimer’s patients should not be told so they do not lose confidence in
The ability to predict or diagnosis miss information produced by genes is called genetic testing. This testing can be done before conception, during pregnancy, and of the infant and parents after birth. So when is the best time to discuss this with parents? The sooner the better. According to Pillitteri (2014), nurses play a
Copeland carefully selects words in the introduction to emphasize an overall nonchalance in compiling such comprehensive information, “Over the past five years, as the price of DNA testing kits has dropped and their quality has improved, the phenomenon of ‘recreational genomics’ has taken off,” (Copeland). The use of “recreational” suggests the practice of gathering broad scientific information lacks gravity. In fact, the author contrasts the word with more levity with the use of “genomics”, a concrete science that affects the structure and function of genetic information. The dramatic usage indicates to the audience that users of DNA testing are incapable of understanding all possible consequences of accessible genetic testing. Traditions of past generations provide a foundation for the identity of future generations.
Based on our past history (e.g., the Tuskegee experiment) it is now crucial to apply confidentiality and informed consent in studies, especially human subjects. Therefore, harm can reduced as much as possible. I feel the past history is a lesson that social scientists should avoid in studies. All human subjects are required to understand the risk factors and procedures in a study they are participating in. If they require confidentiality, researchers should also agree.
A child may feel isolated and not want to open up to others because he/she may not know how the other person may react to it. A child may start to behaviour differently with his/her loved ones as