Genetic Testing
If you had the decision to predict your future, would you take it? Or would you let things pan out as your life goes along? Since the discovery of the DNA molecule in 1952, doctors are striving to predict your future. Now, doctors are able to do this by genetic testing which allows you to see if you have a gene alteration in your DNA sequence. Many people assume of course they would take it because it will predict if they are at risk of getting a disease or not. However, if I had a choice to get genetic tested I would not take the opportunity for multiple reasons.
In the first place, genetic testing invades our privacy. Yes, I have given them my DNA for testing but do they really keep my genetic information a secret? Although where they store everyone’s genetic information is secure, the data may be used for commercial interests. I believe I should be the only one allowed access to the information and if the doctors want to use my DNA for other testing, they have to get verification from me every time. It’s already bad that people have access to our personal information without us knowing, but no one should be able to have access to
…show more content…
Insurance companies want to see the results of your test to group people based on whether they are at risk of developing a disease or not. People may have to pay a high amount of money just because they are at a higher risk of getting a disease. We have no control over our DNA sequence so why should we have to pay a lot of money or be denied coverage completely? We may also be discriminated at work and for jobs. Some businesses have health hazards and are only able to hire people who are not at risk. According to Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez from Santa Clara University, some companies include genetic testing in their pre-employment evaluation. Clearly, the use of genetic testing will result in discrimination involving insurance companies and
I agree. In some cases, knowing that you have a mutation and will be affected with the disease could be very emotional for an individual. One never knows how they will respond to the result and pretesting counseling may not fully prepare the individual for the result. One question that has been raised is should genetic counseling be allowed for diseases that are not treatable? It is thought that if an individual knows they will develop a condition that has no treatment it could cause psychological harm, stigmatization, and possible discrimination.
Copeland’s purpose to inform, as well as engage or entertain, is developed through the structure of the article. Specifically, the structure of Copeland’s article consists of a personal story and other examples, along with statistical data. Copeland wants her readers to understand how DNA testing can be an emotional process, having positive outcomes for many families and yet also causing potential burdens for
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
In chapter seven of Genetic Turning Points by James Peterson, the topic of genetic counselors is discussed in terms of their role in the genetic testing process. In my ethical opinion, genetic counselors are a necessary component of the genetic testing process. Without them, ethical lines are more likely to be crossed as I believe more patients would undergo genetic testing without fully understanding what he/ she is giving their consent for and also receive unrequested results. Additionally, I believe that the absence of genetic counselors leads to patients being pressured into receiving tests he/she did not want or ask to take. , and receive unrequested results as well.
In "Building Baby from the Genes Up" by Ronald M. Green, Green expresses his view that genetically modifying humans is not necessarily a good thing for human, but that it’s not such a bad thing or inevitable. Green claims that genetic modification is beneficial to society and would help improve living. Green exclaims that genetic modification is an inevitable future and that the quality of the human population will improve. Green proposes the idea that genetic modification will improve the quality of the human population by using it with health related issues such as obesity and dyslexia and that no children will have to suffer anymore because of those problems. Knowing about our gene will give us more freedom according to Green.
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.
In conclusion, genetic testing is not needed because of the many consequences. Maybe it soon will be needed, but in the end, that could cause more problems for individuals than solving
Biotechnology has been progressing at a blazingly fast rate since the 1700s, when the first anesthetics were developed. Since then, many technologies have sprung from the void, which have assisted countless doctors around the globe diagnose and treat patients in a safer and more effective manner. An extremely promising division of the field has come in the form of genetic testing, which has applications other than medicine, such as forensics and security. Though genetic technology holds great potential for the future of biomedicine, like any technology, it arrives with its drawbacks, which must be extracted and corrected from its pure form. A primary ethical issue of genetic testing could come in the form of genetic discrimination.
Gattaca shows many times that genetic testing can be beneficial and has completely taken over society but at the same time provides many hardships like discrimination against certain ranks of
It’s a big concern since, many people don’t get genetic testing due to the fear of being denied insurance (Sales, 2017). Those who are at risk for genetic disorders also go to great lengths to get insurance (Sales, 2017). One person who did is, Sarah Dillon, she removed not only her breast but ovaries in hopes to get insurance, as she was at risk for a genetic mutation that caused breast and ovarian cancer (Sales, 2017). However, the GINA (Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act) prohibits employers and health insurance companies from denying jobs or coverage based on an individual's DNA (Wright, 2009). It’s now against the law to deny one insurance due to their DNA (Wright
The genetic counselor will go over the information in the questionnaire to gather and evaluate your personal and family history. They will decide with you what are the next steps to better understand your personal risk and to determine what level of information is right for you. What if they recommend genetic testing?
Should or should we not prohibit genetically engineered babies is the question to ask. After years and year of trying to figure out the cure for a disease like a mitochondrial disease, a group of professional on the topic believes that it would greatly benefit the baby ’s outcome exceptionally if their parents has harmful genetics. Most people concern would be how the baby would turn out because there have not been any clinical trials that prove that the genetics that is engineered properly work like they should. I personally believe that the genetics of baby should not be engineered, but I do believe that it should be up to the parent of the children since it is their child in the first place.
As time has passed, more and more employers have begun ignoring this law. Genetic screening of future employees should not occur as the hiring process becomes discriminatory, the genetic results aren’t entirely conclusive, and the results can bring an emotional toll on the individual. Choosing to not hire someone based upon their genetic profile is considered discrimination. Genes are fixed characteristics that cannot be changed, just like race or ethnic heritage. The hiree doesn't have any choice in his/her family traits.
Some argue that it is against Christianity. Nonetheless, holy books does not have an explicitly written text about genetic screening. The arguments are only constructed from implications of the holy texts. As the holy texts might hold many different meanings, who can know for sure, if genetic screening is just or unjust way? As this topic is very complicated dilemma and needs a further debates to come to a common consensus, one should consider two outcomes: when it is morally accepted and when it is condemned as unethical thing to do.
In general, DNA is the basic element of the human body. If you do a testing on DNA, you can easily know the situation of family (generation) history and predict the future of the Estonia family. An article, “What are the Pros and Cons of Genetic Screening?”, written by Claudia Smith, points out that the result of testing genes will decide whether their family should enlarge or not. The result is helpful because it can know if the families have defective genes or not, or if they should have a child. Testing genetics has been spread to many countries to know and decide their family future.