tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post919849216384333535..comments2023-08-16T04:03:30.595-04:00Comments on Can U Talk About Genomics? (CUTAG): Baby's First TestKee Chan, PhDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12458864216039535394noreply@blogger.comBlogger69125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-46076953509789803202013-11-02T23:55:07.793-04:002013-11-02T23:55:07.793-04:00While whole genome sequencing might allow physicia...While whole genome sequencing might allow physicians and parents to become aware of treatable diseases before the child is born and ultimately save the child's life, gathering information regarding genetic predispositions of a unborn child raises a lot of ethical questions. In our society, every individual is given the autonomous right to decide whether to undergo genetic testing or not. Likewise, I believe the best thing to do is to view a child, unborn or not, in the same way, and extend this right to them as well. As individuals, women have the autonomous right to decide what to do with their own bodies, including when they become pregnant, but I thought it is wrong for parents to have a sense of entitlement when it comes to obtaining genetic and physical characteristics of their child, especially before they are born.Giuliana Greennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-73466583736932943952013-11-02T23:43:42.668-04:002013-11-02T23:43:42.668-04:00I don’t believe it is ethical to do whole genome s...I don’t believe it is ethical to do whole genome sequencing on newborns. I completely agree with life saving screenings but I don’t believe testing for predispositions to chronic conditions or late onset diseases. I believe whole genome sequencing is problematic because in multiple instances it can cause psychological distress especially if there is no cure for a disease. It’s also problematic because it puts the burden of explaining the results to the children on the parents and there’s no guarantee they even understand it themselves. If I decided to have a child I doubt a predisposition to an incurable disease would change my opinion of them. Meilyn Santamarianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-79996444297935687012013-11-02T23:43:00.826-04:002013-11-02T23:43:00.826-04:00I'm not a religious person but I do believe th...I'm not a religious person but I do believe that things happen in life for a reason. Knowing if my child is predisposed to a disease would not change my opinion about my child, but would only make me worried and overprotective. It's just a dark cloud. The heel stick is reasonable because it tests for major diseases that could cause death to a newborn, and knowing this would reverse the disease and save the child's life. As genome sequencing continues to develop, so is modern medicine. As people become sick, there is treatment, and as years go by, treatment becomes more effective and efficient. <br /><br />Ethically, there are many issues surrounding newborn genetic sequencing because the child's autonomy is not being respected. Granted that the child does not have much say or opinions, it does not mean that later on in life they will not either. Parents are supposed to choose what is best for the child, but the child is still an individual being. The child could resent the parents later on in life for choosing to sequence his or her genome. However, if a family has strong genetic disposition for a disease, and diagnosis would be life saving, then sequencing a child's genome could be justified.Vickie Hahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16663663879398542481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-11254671979025831322013-11-02T23:38:49.631-04:002013-11-02T23:38:49.631-04:00Screening newborns for all genes allows scientists...Screening newborns for all genes allows scientists to learn more about a variety of diseases. The benefits of such a practice are great. However, the ethical issues regarding this matter are difficult to assess. It is hard to determine the effect these screenings will have on babies when they grow up. These children’s rights are in the hands of their parents at birth, but the children had no choice in the matter at that point in time. While the information collected will contribute greatly to the scientific community, it will be at the expense of the children’s individual feelings and right. Therefore, how ethical these screenings are will depend on the parents. If parents are willing to take the information and act positively on it, then it is ethical to use whole genome sequencing. However, if parents are not willing to act positively on the results, then it is unethical. Ultimately, it is the parents that will have to deal with the information these screenings provide. The way these parents act will determine how the children are affected. <br /><br />When I have children, I will not change my opinion based on my babies’ genes. As I have mentioned many times before, I do not judge people based on their biological predispositions. Especially since they are my children, I would not look at them in a different light. In fact, I would much prefer to know about these genes so that I can acknowledge them and learn how to deal with the implications they bring. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03863779735810592068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-13972547128717413932013-11-02T23:21:34.985-04:002013-11-02T23:21:34.985-04:00I think it is unethical to screeen newborns for di...I think it is unethical to screeen newborns for diseases that do not have a cure. I don't mean diseases like cancer which have a good chance of being reversed but diseases that are chronic and cannot be cured like Huntingtons or MS. There is no difference in knowing that you're going to have this disease if you can't cure it besides maybe living a fuller life.I think it's important to screen children for immediate life threatening diseases because you can save their life.<br /><br />My opinion would not change about my child having an incurable disease - i would love he/she all the same. I would just be very dissapointed that I had to find out much sooner than I wanted to because I'd be so worried about checking for signs and symptoms of said disease. It would just be too much stress and cost a lot of money. It's not the same as being an adult woman and being screened for breast cancer where you can take immediate action because you're and adult woman, with a baby you have to think about what they might want in the future and that's not a decision that parents should make. But if tests are cheap and available and relatively not invasive, I'd have my child tested for immediate life threats, not all genetic disorders.Elizabeth Betancourthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08196338906364790935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-91928405897460568022013-11-02T23:10:59.669-04:002013-11-02T23:10:59.669-04:00I think that knowledge is power. Finding out every...I think that knowledge is power. Finding out everything as soon as possible is the best option in my opinion. If it's cheap and fast, I support whole genome sequencing for newborns. Knowing about the predisposition for an incurable disease does not stop it from potentially happening or not happening. Also, genes for something like breast cancer aren't definitive. <br /><br />There may be things that people can do to avoid turning certain genes on that we discover in the future too. Your genome is a blueprint and things don't always go according to plan. But I think it's best to be ready for what may be ahead. Again, if this can become a common-place thing that's cheap and easy, I would definitely want this for my children!<br /><br />Josh Riveranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-11218811355211782152013-11-02T22:42:59.571-04:002013-11-02T22:42:59.571-04:00Knowing that my child is predisposed to incurable ...Knowing that my child is predisposed to incurable disease would just be painful and heartbreaking. I would be consumed by guilt and worry and consequently, be overprotective of my child. I would love and cherish my child nonetheless, but I would be living with a constant fear that my child would not get an opportunity to live a happy life.Haejin Hwanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08289466641037933352noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-7532002095368790472013-11-02T22:08:38.176-04:002013-11-02T22:08:38.176-04:00If I were a parent with a child who had an incurab...If I were a parent with a child who had an incurable disease, I would want to know. It is my responsibility to increase their quality of life as much as possible. Therefore, I would want to get a jump on knowing what measures I can take to prevent or improve anything I can. For the population, I feel it's ethical to screen newborns for genes that predispose them to things that parents can reasonably manage. It doesn't have to be something curable, but something that a parent can at least do something about. <br /><br />Yet, I'm hard pressed to say it's unethical to withhold information that they can't do anything about. While some may think it's cruel to be burdened with circumstances you cannot change, I think it's cruel to let people fantastically think that things will always be alright. I feel it's kinder to let a parent know ahead of time that their child may have a short or compromised life so that they can readily accept it and make the most of it rather than have them blindsided with things being torn away from them in the moment. I don't know why people think it's so healthy to choose denial over confrontation and unpreparedness over readiness.<br /><br />I do appreciate the warning of abusive eugenics, that is a significant sociological takeaway. I recall a genetics video that my 8th grade science teacher showed us in 2005, not long after the completion of the human genome project. There was a man interviewed claiming that one day you'll be able to just select every quality about your child. Even my 12-13 year old self knew that this was a very long way off, if possible. But it seems more plausible as the years go by.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17182122086565472442noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-31829713977996169002013-11-02T21:54:52.296-04:002013-11-02T21:54:52.296-04:00Genome sequencing can definitely be both beneficia...Genome sequencing can definitely be both beneficial and detrimental. Although I do believe it is ethical to screen newborns for all diseases including incurable diseases like breast cancer, I can also see how it may affect the family negatively depending on the results. If my child was predisposed to an incurable genetic disease, my opinion would not change. I would still love them. However, I think I would side with the whole genome sequencing because as technology advances, there will be new ways to cure these incurable diseases. I believe there will always be a cure eventually, even if it will take years.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17950918001546953389noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-44283071024431536932013-11-02T21:47:28.794-04:002013-11-02T21:47:28.794-04:00I think that some newborn screenings should be man...I think that some newborn screenings should be mandatory, but not genome sequencing. The parents should have the option to have their newborn’s genome sequenced. If the sequencing is mandatory, I believe it can do more harm than good, especially if the parents are against the idea of sequencing in the first place. However, some scenarios would be more appropriate, say the child has a good chance of inheriting a condition from their parent(s). In this instance, genome screening would be a good option, especially if early detection of a condition can prevent the condition from worsening. Nevertheless, many factors need to be taken into consideration, such as autonomy, privacy, and informed consent.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05876708544024542531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-42690191473081426772013-11-02T20:56:35.484-04:002013-11-02T20:56:35.484-04:00I think that this argument is a very difficult one...I think that this argument is a very difficult one. As parents, people want to know what diseases their children could possibly develop. However, as the child/future adult people usually make their own choices about whether or not they want to find out if they are predisposed to a genetic disease. If I had a child who I knew was predisposed to an incurable genetic disease, I would not love them any less. I would do everything possible to make sure they have the best life possible and get them whatever treatment they can. Their diagnosis would not affect my love for them. Ashley Donahuenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-81227614542593692652013-11-02T20:22:46.223-04:002013-11-02T20:22:46.223-04:00Whole genome sequencing will allow parents to obta...Whole genome sequencing will allow parents to obtain information about their children that could be potentially beneficial, but only in certain contexts. It is difficult to say whether a child should be tested for ALL diseases, as this may lead to more harm than good for both the child’s family and the child. I believe that it is ethical to test children for genes that may reveal predispositions for certain diseases if the child has a family history of a certain disease, and there is a sound, logical reason to test the child. If the doctors and family agree that the test will strongly benefit the child’s current and future health and wellbeing (through implementing certain prevention efforts associated with a given disease), and there are minimal ethical and psychological risks for finding out certain information about the child, then one could argue that the test should be done. Whole genome sequencing could uphold one of the four principles of medical ethics, called beneficence, or doing well for the patient.<br /><br />However, whole genome sequencing has drawbacks, which are mentioned in the article. Basically, it threatens to allow people to enhance genetic traits that are already considered normal. This is especially true if testing genomes of fetuses becomes commonplace, as some parents may decide to not have a child if they do not have certain traits that they desire for their offspring, such as high athletic ability or brown hair. Selecting genes unassociated with disease could potentially be unethical, as it could promote societal values consistent with those of eugenics, which would be horribly problematic. Laura Donnellynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-39548989314157426692013-11-02T20:11:17.210-04:002013-11-02T20:11:17.210-04:00This article continues to highlight some of the im...This article continues to highlight some of the important problems in medicine and that is whether or not things are ethical. In class we discussed the importance of consent and personal choice. In this case, choice plays a significant role in genome sequencing. Parents make the choice on whether or not they want their children tested and therefore it is ethical in their standards to do so. As stated in the questions Whole Genome Sequencing in newborns is likely something that will become common place in hospitals. Therefore I do think it is ethical to screen newborns for all genes.Although it might cause parents to be anxious about the health of their baby I would feel they would be prepared for the lifestyle that may lay ahead them. They could better prepare themselves financially, emotionally and personally and that ultimately will provide a safer environment for their children. However I do believe parents don't have to tell their children if the sequencing reveals that a child has genes that may make them prone to diseases that may not show up for decades. This will cause an undue burden for the child and parents and it is important that their child has a normal childhood without constantly being in fear. With that being said, I don't think I would change my opinion of my baby if I knew they were predisposed to any conditions or disease. If anything I could be a better parent by being prepared for any situation and discomfort we may face as a family. lilihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12302279200384217850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-17345028591617013282013-11-02T20:07:23.569-04:002013-11-02T20:07:23.569-04:00I agree with the statement made by the sociologist...I agree with the statement made by the sociologist in this study that genome sequencing for newborns sounds great, theoretically. The idea of knowing that your child may have an increased likelihood of developing certain conditions and that you can then structure their health care or diet to maximize their health sounds like a great concept. However, it is clear that so much more needs to be taken into account. I think the ethics of it really depends on what conditions are being screened for, particularly when the conditions or diseases do not have a known cure or treatment. In those cases, I think it puts a lot of unnecessary stress and anxiety on parents, who then have to decide if, when, and how they will share this information with their child. Furthermore, it is important to remember that the newborns never gave consent to be tested. I would not choose to have my newborn undergo full genome sequencing, and I feel that knowing that my child is predisposed to an incurable disease would not alter my opinion of them. Kati Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06200013594378312078noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-39797223499505360862013-11-02T19:14:11.341-04:002013-11-02T19:14:11.341-04:00Scientific medical advancements continue to grant ...Scientific medical advancements continue to grant us the knowledge and information we need to advocate for better, healthier lives. Because of these advancements, human health and life expectancy has grown drastically over the last few decades. Not only are we becoming more adept at treating existing disease, we are currently even more capable at detecting and potentially treating diseases that we may be predisposed to. Health care providers have a duty to do the best they can in preserving patients health, which includes informing them about diseases they are at risk for and what they can do to prevent it or treat it so that their patients can resume living healthy lives.<br /><br />As the technology of while genuine sequencing becomes more and more affordable, I think it will be extremely beneficial in the long run for babies to be tested for genetic predispositions. Doctors and generic counselors could then be able to work with parents accordingly to plan and prepare for their childs well being. However, I think that doctors and genetic counselors should work closely with parents to gage how to release the information (e.g. consent forms detailing risks and benefits of releasing genetic information). In these way, parents can choose for themselves whether or not they would want to receive this information and if so, how much information.<br /><br />I don't think I would change my opinion of my baby if I knew he or she was predisposed to a genetic condition. I think that I would experience feelings of anxiety or sadness but it is only natural to worry about something that you care about. However, because I understand that genres are not definite, and that mutstions and variants are not definite, and that they do exist, I think I would just have to accept that such variations and mutations do exist as a part of human life.Cindy Meihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02719805693547287582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-66553614888241172742013-11-02T19:11:21.029-04:002013-11-02T19:11:21.029-04:00Although genome sequencing offers a great number o...Although genome sequencing offers a great number of benefits to newborn screening, I believe genome sequencing would ultimately be more detrimental than beneficial. Some parents who are presented with knowledge that their baby carries genes for an untreatable disease may not know how to handle the information, causing a great deal of stress on the family. Genome sequencing of the newborn will also reveal genetic information of the parents, denying them of their right not to know. Genome sequencing also has the potential to strain the relationship between the parents, as one parent may blame the other parent for not knowing their genetic information prior to planning for a baby. Due to all of the possible negative implications, I do not think it is ethical to include genome sequencing in newborn screening tests. In my opinion, the cons of genome sequencing outweigh the benefits, especially when it comes to testing for diseases that do not have a known cure. If i were to have a baby, and became knowledgeable of my child's untreatable disease, my opinion of them would not change. I try to not imagine a world where an individuals genetic information and susceptibility to a certain disease dictates out they are treated.Whether my child was predisposed to a certain disease or not, I would still try to provide a healthy and nurturing environment. Sarah Dillardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03071753955611069724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-35124256381554995172013-11-02T19:04:33.268-04:002013-11-02T19:04:33.268-04:00Despite the many advantages of whole genome sequen...Despite the many advantages of whole genome sequencing, I do not think that it is ethical. Sequencing a newborns genome will not prevent the onset of the disease, it will only inform the parents and medical practitioners so they can be better prepared when the time comes. But it will cause a lot of tension and stress because the parents will be spend more time worrying about when the disease will appear instead of enjoying the time they have while their newborn is free of any diseases. If I were given the option to get the whole genome sequence of my child I would not take that opportunity. However, if i did and my child had a predisposition for a certain disease my opinion of my child would not change at all. I would take the necessary steps to prepare for the onset of the disease and I would try to not let the idea of the disease consume my thoughts, taking away from the joyous gift of a newborn away from me and my family. Ali Reesehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14915393668533265848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-17688159611163611252013-11-02T18:40:27.656-04:002013-11-02T18:40:27.656-04:00The fact that we have genome sequencing for newbor...The fact that we have genome sequencing for newborns available to us is undoubtedly an exceptional accomplishment in the field of biotechnology. However, like with all medical procedures, particularly one as contentious as whole genome sequencing, I think there should be restrictions and strict regulations. I think it is not ethical to screen newborns for incurable diseases. Personally, in this context, I don’t understand the rationale behind disclosing information about a health problem that ultimately has no answer. As I see it, this type of information will have more detrimental effects than beneficial outcomes for the parties involved. For example, the parents may be given information that causes them to live in perpetual fear of their child’s life. In turn, the child may not have the opportunity to live his or her life to the fullest. <br /><br />I think one of the biggest problems is that parents don’t fully understand the magnitude of the test before opting to go through with it. As one of the parents in the NPR interview pointed out, they hadn’t really considered all the implications of the test and when they received the information, they were not sure about what to do with it (health literacy barriers). If I were to have a child predisposed to an incurable disease, my opinion of them probably would not change. Even if the disease were terminal, I believe every child deserves to live the fullest, happiest life that they can, learning to cope with their limitations and overcome their challenges. <br />Isatu Crosbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02525495595905356534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-20002682276591495912013-11-02T18:30:11.146-04:002013-11-02T18:30:11.146-04:00I think this is a very grey area. Yes, I think th...I think this is a very grey area. Yes, I think that it is the duty of a doctor to do all they can to help prevent disease or prepare their patients as much as possible if they already have or are predisposed to a certain disease or diseases. If they dont do this they are not doing their job and that is unethical on their part. However, by informing parents about a certain disposition their child might have, although it warns them of it, it does not stop the disease from coming and that can leave the parents in a very bad state of mind with the child. They begin to spend more and more time worrying about what is to come as opposed to what they have. Due to the mental strain it would have on the families I would say that it is more unethical to tell parents about certain diseases, especially those that have no cure, than to just not say anything. If I was in this situation, I could not imagine my feelings for my child changing with information like this. I would just make every moment spent with them while they are strong and health more worth while. If the disease they could get will come in the future, we will cross that bridge when we come to it.Thaddeus Babiechttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13943002401673631021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-46674043128047843802013-11-02T18:16:49.516-04:002013-11-02T18:16:49.516-04:00Whole Genome Sequencing is something that on the o...Whole Genome Sequencing is something that on the outside sounds like an amazing and huge accomplishment in the sciences, and don’t get me wrong it is. However when we look close into it we see that maybe it may cause more fear and anxiety that isn’t needed. The birth of a child is always a lot of stress on the parents and I feel that 30 diagnoses from the heel-prick test is already a lot for them to take in. If they were given thousands of diagnoses to comprehend I think that would be too much and to exhausting to take in. There are too many questions and concerns to figure out when given all of that information. As in the article, Rowan and her husband had a million questions running through their heads when they realized what the whole genome sequencing entails. They asked, "[Do] we kind of keep that to ourselves? Or would it be better to just only get the information we really need and then genuinely not know so that we don't have to walk down that road?” When you first have a child you want to do what is best for them and keep them as healthy as possible however these diagnoses may be too much to handle at birth. If the parents feel that genomic sequencing is something that they would want for their child then they should be given the choice I just do not think it should be mandatory. Perhaps they can get the sequencing down the line if at birth it is something they do not want to deal with right away. Finding out that my baby is predisposed to a certain disease would make me feel that I need to set up their lives so that maybe I could prevent it from happening. I would feel the need to protect them as much as possible and sometimes it may not be enough. I feel as though sometimes it is better off to not know. Laura Kodackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16925668423684581323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-6901015546100652262013-11-02T17:04:07.744-04:002013-11-02T17:04:07.744-04:00We should watch the movie GATTACA in class, becaus...We should watch the movie GATTACA in class, because it exemplifies the worries mentioned in this article. With entire genome sequencing, there is the fear that eugenics will shape our society and that parents will pick their children based on their DNA. Although they may seem outlandish, it could be something that we see in our future. But at the same time, I do not think it is that ridiculous to use genetic modification to conceive a child with the best traits. May be it is natural to want to do everything that is possible to have the healthiest, best looking, (insert positive traits here) child. From an evolutionary perspective we try to mate with good health looking people because they will provide use with healthy children and support to raise them. And from psychological studies, people try to go for the best options that are available to them. The phrase, "she's out of my league" goes to show that people quantify certain qualities and try to go for them. Maybe genetic modification could be a good thing for people who have "unfavorable" genes that cannot mate with "favorable" genetic partners to conceive more favorable children. If cheap genetic modification is made available to all, it could completely reverse the "she's out of my league" phenomenon for future generations. Sarah Ghabbournoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-58848253008082179082013-11-02T16:19:43.373-04:002013-11-02T16:19:43.373-04:00
I don’t think it is ethical to newborns to underg...<br />I don’t think it is ethical to newborns to undergo whole genome sequencing at birth. As the NPR podcast stated, this could lead to vulnerable child syndrome. It may also change how a parent raises the child, especially if the parent knows that their child carries the gene for cancer. All of this fear could be so unnecessary, especially if the child never developed the disease. I think that the family should just live their life how they would normally without worrying about what genes the child carries. If I had a child and I knew he or she was predisposed to an incurable disease, my opinions wouldn’t change of them, however, I think how I would raise them would change. I would be very cautious to not expose them to things that could further increase their chance to develop this incurable disease, and I think that would interfere with their entire childhood. <br /><br /><br />Anneliese Pozzinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-88589706567952539552013-11-02T15:11:26.785-04:002013-11-02T15:11:26.785-04:00I do believe that it is ethical to screen newborns...I do believe that it is ethical to screen newborns for all genes even if there is no cure or treatment for it. I think that doing this will allow geneticists to identify abnormalities in genes and discover conditions that we didn't know existed before. I do not believe that we should test for genes within the womb because I do believe that this will cause parents to chose the option of having their baby or not. Currently Amniocentesis exists for pregnant women to find out if their baby has a condition such as Downs syndrome and this already affects some parents' decisions about holding their baby to term or terminating the pregnancy. If we decide to do whole genome screening on feti (multiple fetus) then parents would be terminating their babies because they may have asthma, a chance of Alzheimer's or even if they have a physical abnormality that doesn't affect their quality of life at all such as heterochromia. <br /><br />I don't believe my opinion of my baby would change in response to their genetic testing. However, I do believe that I would raise them in a manner that would be beneficial to them. For example if I know that my child would have asthma, then I would take care to eliminate things at home that may trigger that. Essentially, I would be proactive with their care. I wouldn't want to know their entire genetic makeup because this would be too much of a burden for me to handle for my child. However, I believe that the results should be kept on file and that the doctors should notify me and my child when any disease that they may have might have a chance of developing. For example, if my child was predisposed to having breast cancer, then I believe that when they are an adult and they are around the age that breast cancer usually develops, then we would begin screening for the disease. Shani Ogilviehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16396230231476149477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-23539647355984636982013-11-02T14:25:03.602-04:002013-11-02T14:25:03.602-04:00I think it is great that we have the technology to...I think it is great that we have the technology to test and screen for all these various diseases and whole genome sequencing is just taking this to the next level. Instead of fighting against the inevitable evolution and many uses of technology as it becomes more assessable, we should embrace it and instead familiarize ourselves with it. It is therefore ethical because the genome sequencing doesn't do any harm to the child, but only potential good. The born child will have these predispositions whether or not they are detected so it is a good idea for the parents to be aware of them at an early stage so that they can take the appropriate long or short term action. I would not see my child differently if I found they had a genetic predisposition because that is something that I have no control over since I can't change what genes/traits/diseases I pass on to my child. I would be happy to learn about what my child may have a possibility of developing even if there is no known treatment because it would make me aware of actively seeking to improve my child's quality of life by giving him/her everything possible to be healthy and prevent the onset of disease.Samantha Pinheironoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1829604838323083637.post-72565691736011857452013-11-02T13:21:22.976-04:002013-11-02T13:21:22.976-04:00A heel stick test is one thing, but a whole entire...A heel stick test is one thing, but a whole entire genome sequencing on a newborn child may demonstrate to be more detrimental than beneficial. It is tricky though. Perhaps finding out your child has a predisposition for breast cancer, a disease without a definitive cure, will cause you to feed them differently, make them exercise more, reduce stress, abstain from smoking or anything that may bring about epigenetic change to reduce their risks. A predisposition may just be a predisposition, but as a parent you are doing everything in your power to give your child the healthiest fighting chance at life. On the other hand, social and psychological issues need to be addressed. There are certain cons about being "foretold" the future. The parent will watch the child grow up now realizing they have a genetic susceptibility for certain diseases and they may overreact to small things. Maybe the child's experiencing growing pains of adolescence and the parent flips out thinking that its symptoms of a disease and rushes him or her to the doctor. These unnecessary visits to the doctor and stresses will accumulate and develop a certain psychosis. <br />The reason why heel stick tests don't survey for diseases like breast cancer is because it would not pass the Wilson and Jungner's Screening criteria. Several criteria would up hold, such as the importance, detectability, and benefits of early testing. However the criteria of fully understanding breast cancer and balancing costs would not but fulfilled. jensenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09344866712467402992noreply@blogger.com