Embryos, Ethics, and edicts

The general concern about the ethical type 2 PGD / HLA testing is the moral status of the embryo. Many books have been written on this topic and many others are covered.

A number of outliers on the bell curve of ethical commentators were that life begins at conception (or, otherwise, fertilization). The Group of antipodes, as the embryos are neither persons nor sentient, they have a moral status and can be experimented upon without ethical constraint.

A central location states that, even if the embryos are not people, and are not sentient, are due particular interest as symbols of mankind. This configuration can be described morale as "the dominant view that the preimplantation embryo has only a limited moral value" .1

But this view does not imply that any and all forms of testing are appropriate. Significant value to humanity must be derived from embryo research to be considered ethical. Research purposes can not be trivial - such as research on embryos would not be morally justified.

Many were concerned about the creation of embryos for instrumental purposes only. Apparently this violates Kant's prohibition against using people merely as a means. But the embryos are not persons, and Kant means / ends imperative does not apply to embryos created exclusively to provide HLA-matched stem cells.

Regardless, for those who believe that destroying embryos is murder, moral and philosophical considerations and other arguments are irrelevant. For these people, PGD / HLA testing is bad and should be banned.

Many of those who are not so extreme it may still have concerns about the creation of a human life to be for the purposes that involve his destruction. A counterargument might note that many embryos are created as part of PGD / HLA testing procedure. Some of this group of healthy embryos could be donated to infertile couples, so there would be a net gain of life. Another counter-argument refers to the value and proportionality. The destruction of the embryo - which is 9 months removed from getting all the experiences of life - is weighed against saving the life of an individual who already has many years of life experience and that has goals, hopes and intentions.

Type 2 PGD / HLA testing has many significant advantages over the type 1 test. The main advantage is to avoid the need for a developing fetus and the distribution of a newborn. All possible ethical difficulties with bringing a new baby in the family are similarly avoided by testing type 2. This ethical dilemma involves a sick parent, whose ability to make objective decisions about a child savior would be seriously compromised. This situation is completely avoided type 2 test.

The issue of distributive justice is a fundamental problem in all aspects of reproductive genetics and genetic medicine in general. The costs of both type 1 and 2 PGD / HLA tests are significant. In the absence of financial support for people in middle and lower socioeconomic strata, these procedures will be used exclusively by the rich. Moral and ethical considerations require an equitable distribution of these resources. In Europe, the centralized government could do PGD / HLA testing available to a defined group. A national lottery could distribute the limited funds. In the financing of the United States would need to come from private foundations. It 's unlikely that federal funding would have provided for procedures that involve the creation and destruction of embryos.

PGD ​​/ HLA testing should be regulated by governments. For example, the test for the phenotypic characteristics such as the type of body and hair and eye color, should be canceled. Ongoing national campaigns should be directed towards functional training of medical and scientific citizens.

1DE Wert G, et al: The future (r) evolution of preimplantation genetic diagnosis / human leukocyte antigen testing: ethical reflections. Stem Cells 25 (9) :2167-2172, 2007 .......