Moral issues in technology: Ethical issues raised by prenatal DNA sequencing genetics inherited from the family. Examples of these disorders are abnormal body growth, mental retardation and other conditions that could affect the child and parents in the future. A new technology called prenatal screening is used to detect such irregularities before delivery. Prenatal screening to diagnose specific fetal conditions has become essential prenatal care for some women. Testing techniques range from noninvasive to invasive, but this document focuses on the invasive techniques used during this procedure. Two well-known invasive tests are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis in which cells are extracted from the fetus and analyzed under a microscope. Geneticists can then determine whether the fetus has too few or too many chromosomes, or whether the chromosomes are damaged and could cause a genetic problem. This rapidly developing technology raises the following question: “Is it morally permissible to use prenatal screening to terminate a pregnancy based on established genetic diseases?” Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay To answer this research question these ethical concerns will be evaluated: accuracy of tests, importance of medical information about the consequences of a particular genetic disease, the associated risk, and social pressure on an individual's decision. On the contrary, it is argued that this technology could improve the well-being of both parents and child. The moral actors considered are both the parents and the fetus since both can see their lives improve or worsen due to technology. In this analysis, they are considered equally important. Moral Analysis This chapter contains arguments that defend the moral permissibility of using prenatal screening. These topics are the accuracy of the process, the medical information provided, the risks included, and the pressure from society. Accuracy In most cases, genetic screening (non-invasive) is offered to pregnant women during the first meeting between the doctor and the pregnant woman. Parents are free to decide whether they want the procedure to be performed or not. Screening tests can evaluate the possibility that the embryo may have some common birth defects. However, they cannot indicate with certainty whether the child has a genetic disorder as the accuracy is about 10% lower than invasive tests. A prenatal genetic screening has an accuracy of around 90-95% and there is a 2.5% in which the results can be false positive. It is imprecise, conflicting, and even an inadequate test does not make judgments about disability, but rather about the likelihood that any child may have a disorder, which may or may not be true. However, these disorders can affect different people differently. While some of them require more medical care, others can lead a healthy life. If parents make a decision based on inaccurate results, they could accidentally make a decision that would end the birth of a healthy baby. Therefore the technology would not be morally permissible. Medical information Before and after receiving the information provided by prenatal genetic screening, allparents need to be informed about their situation. Preventive information is necessary as it could pose a risk to the mother or baby. After screening, more information is needed to know what to expect from a child with Down syndrome. Promote individuals' freedom of choice. Parents must be provided with complete and neutral information on screening processes and consequences. Information about the consequences of having a child with Down syndrome is important, since different genetic conditions lead to very variable consequences in terms of the child's quality of life. Depending on the severity of the condition, a person with Down syndrome may have a relatively independent existence with little help with daily living or be forced to live in a non-independent environment. Some studies show that in some antenatal screening programs the explanations provided by health workers were considered inadequate, unclear or insufficient by mothers, as well as that workers' understanding of some aspects of the technology process was lacking. Parents' perceptions are also influenced by the opinions of the healthcare personnel providing the information. It seems that the specialization of professionals, religion, sex, the number of children they have and ethnic origin can influence the information they transmit and, consequently, the choices offered to parents. The complexity of genetics combined with the notion of risk makes the information provided even more difficult for parents to understand, especially when they are vulnerable and anxious when faced with an important decision about their child. The waiting period before obtaining the results and the uncertainty regarding them are a source of stress and anxiety for prospective parents. Risks Non-invasive screening tests are safe for the mother and fetus. However this is not the case with invasive diagnostics. Invasive diagnostic tests can detect numerous genetic conditions caused by imperfections in a gene or chromosome. They can indicate the existence of a genetic problem with high accuracy, but some diagnostic tests are risky and can lead to miscarriage. The pregnant woman is at risk, both physically and psychologically, during the testing process. Even if the probability of miscarriage is low, it is still present. This possibility of fetal loss also includes healthy fetuses that could have been born alive and well if the diagnostic test had not been performed (Health and Commissioner, 2008, 20). In conclusion, the implementation of the test can give a final result that people in the medical world; parents; family members and people in society actually want to prevent this from happening. Consequentialism indicates that an act is morally permissible if and only if (and because) it promotes as much good, impartially considered, as any other available act of action. This technology that makes it possible to accidentally terminate a pregnancy is not acceptable because it does not promote good, instead it carries the risk of death of the child. The death of a perfectly healthy fetus is a huge risk that can have several negative side effects on the parents (emotionally and also health-wise for the mother). From this we can say that this technology is absolutely unacceptable. Pressure from society Every individual should have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether they want children or not. Despite the contrary, the perceptions of prospective parents are influenced by society's perceptions. The choice of parents, whether or not to undergo the diagnostic test that could lead to the decision to keep the child, is a reflection of social currents, for example the state of mind of thesociety towards disabled people and its thought of 'normality'. In general, prenatal diagnostic testing takes place in a context of social pressure that can significantly limit parents' freedom of choice. Undergoing a prenatal genetic screening test implies the prior belief that terminating a pregnancy or agreeing to give birth to a genetically disabled fetus are both reasonable choices in our society. This is why using prenatal diagnostic technology is not an option for some people. Individuals have an obligation to evaluate the moral norms of their society, to reject them if they are wrong, and to do the right thing. But as mentioned above, parental understanding can be influenced by a number of different factors ranging from culture to religion, sexual orientation, past experience and, of course, societal pressure. How society deals with prenatal diagnosis will impact social values: moral, legal and ethical perspectives. Societal pressure can have a negative physical and mental influence on prospective parents. If the well-being of parents is negatively affected, then it is not morally permissible to use this technology. Arguments for Moral Permissibility The strongest claims against the permissibility of prenatal screening are outlined in this section. Additionally, counterarguments to these arguments are provided after each argument. The first claim argues that parents should have the right not to have a child if his or her genetic condition would make him or her unable to provide sufficient care. The second claim views the moral issue through a welfare hedonism perspective and argues that optimal overall well-being is achieved whenever the child is not born. Providing Adequate Care When deciding whether prenatal screening is morally permissible, the goodness of the outcome of its use is examined more closely. Although several factors are important in determining this, the well-being of the parents (and consequently the well-being of the child) is examined. An important part of promoting a child's well-being is caring for them and spending time with them. When a couple is expecting a baby, they often reflect on how the baby will affect their lives. Depending on the results, they may make changes to their lifestyle so they can properly care for the baby. However, if after the birth of the child it is discovered that he has a genetic disease, for example Down syndrome, the parents' lives are affected differently than they expected. Although financial support and support from family caregivers is available, parents' lives will still be greatly affected. Not only does it increase the intensity of care these children need, but it also increases its duration. While most children become independent once they grow up, several genetic diseases severely limit or even prevent those affected from becoming independent from their parents. Using prenatal DNA sequencing, genetic diseases of the baby can be identified in the early stages of pregnancy. Having this information would allow parents to make a more informed decision about whether they can care for the child. Allowing parents to have this information will ensure that the child is provided with sufficient care, which will improve their life than they would have without this care. In addition to the life of the child, the life of the parents is also affected. Parents will have fewer (unexpected) compromises to make in their lives.While most parents do this willingly, parents may find themselves in a situation where they are forced to change their lives unexpectedly to provide adequate care for the child. Additionally, having a child with a genetic disorder causes a lot of stress for parents. If the parents had become aware of the genetic disease at an early stage of the pregnancy, they could have made an informed decision whether or not to continue with the pregnancy. Having lower knowledge of the unborn child's genetic condition will allow parents who feel they are unable to provide sufficient care to terminate the pregnancy. Parents have the right to make this informed decision, and the technology that allows them to do so is therefore morally permissible. Equal Opportunity The firstThe above argument states that the information obtained using this technology can be used by parents to make an informed decision about the ability to care for the child. Since this is based on the assumption of how much care the child would need, it is not morally permissible since not all children with Down syndrome need the same care. People have a tendency to consider worst-case scenarios on which to base their decisions when making decisions about issues such as the one described in this topic. Another objection to this argument is that every child should have equal opportunities and the decision whether a child fits the parents' lifestyle should not be based on genetic discrepancies as it gives parents the opportunity to discriminate and use other genetic information to choose. a child who fits their idea of the perfect child. This idea was also published by all participants in the survey carried out in the following article. They agreed that unconditional acceptance of children is the most laudable approach. Another objection raised in this article is the obsession with physical perfection in society. In the future this approach could put even more social pressure on disabled people as it is not one hundred percent accurate and will not mean that disabled children will not be born in the future. This type of decision making based on possibly incorrect information and assumptions about a child's life should therefore not be allowed. Child welfare An argument in favor of this technology based on the well-being of the child and parents will be considered. Suppose a woman is pregnant and the test results show that the baby has a genetic disease. The birth may be less favorable due to the fact that the child may suffer and have a low quality of life due to disabilities. Looking at this situation from the point of view of welfare hedonism, according to which well-being depends exclusively on the presence of happiness/enjoyment and the absence of pain/suffering, could lead to the conclusion that in this situation it would be more favorable if the child were not born, then it would promote maximum total well-being for this situation. Under these conditions, the information provided by the prenatal test can be important for the outcome of this scenario and an argument It can be said that the information provided by this technology has the potential to make well-informed decisions leading to a situation with an overall increase of well-being. This situation, therefore, demonstrates that it should be allowed to use prenatal diagnosis technology to gather information that has the potential to lead to a situation of greater well-being. Theories on the mental state It is argued that a genetically disabled child not being born can lead to a situation of maximum general well-being, 1095-5054.

Topic > Moral issues in technology: Ethical issues raised by prenatal DNA sequencing genetics inherited from the family. Examples of these disorders are abnormal body growth, mental retardation and other conditions that could affect the child and parents in the future. A new technology called prenatal screening is used to detect such irregularities before delivery. Prenatal screening to diagnose specific fetal conditions has become essential prenatal care for some women. Testing techniques range from noninvasive to invasive, but this document focuses on the invasive techniques used during this procedure. Two well-known invasive tests are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis in which cells are extracted from the fetus and analyzed under a microscope. Geneticists can then determine whether the fetus has too few or too many chromosomes, or whether the chromosomes are damaged and could cause a genetic problem. This rapidly developing technology raises the following question: “Is it morally permissible to use prenatal screening to terminate a pregnancy based on established genetic diseases?” Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay To answer this research question these ethical concerns will be evaluated: accuracy of tests, importance of medical information about the consequences of a particular genetic disease, the associated risk, and social pressure on an individual's decision. On the contrary, it is argued that this technology could improve the well-being of both parents and child. The moral actors considered are both the parents and the fetus since both can see their lives improve or worsen due to technology. In this analysis, they are considered equally important. Moral Analysis This chapter contains arguments that defend the moral permissibility of using prenatal screening. These topics are the accuracy of the process, the medical information provided, the risks included, and the pressure from society. Accuracy In most cases, genetic screening (non-invasive) is offered to pregnant women during the first meeting between the doctor and the pregnant woman. Parents are free to decide whether they want the procedure to be performed or not. Screening tests can evaluate the possibility that the embryo may have some common birth defects. However, they cannot indicate with certainty whether the child has a genetic disorder as the accuracy is about 10% lower than invasive tests. A prenatal genetic screening has an accuracy of around 90-95% and there is a 2.5% in which the results can be false positive. It is imprecise, conflicting, and even an inadequate test does not make judgments about disability, but rather about the likelihood that any child may have a disorder, which may or may not be true. However, these disorders can affect different people differently. While some of them require more medical care, others can lead a healthy life. If parents make a decision based on inaccurate results, they could accidentally make a decision that would end the birth of a healthy baby. Therefore the technology would not be morally permissible. Medical information Before and after receiving the information provided by prenatal genetic screening, allparents need to be informed about their situation. Preventive information is necessary as it could pose a risk to the mother or baby. After screening, more information is needed to know what to expect from a child with Down syndrome. Promote individuals' freedom of choice. Parents must be provided with complete and neutral information on screening processes and consequences. Information about the consequences of having a child with Down syndrome is important, since different genetic conditions lead to very variable consequences in terms of the child's quality of life. Depending on the severity of the condition, a person with Down syndrome may have a relatively independent existence with little help with daily living or be forced to live in a non-independent environment. Some studies show that in some antenatal screening programs the explanations provided by health workers were considered inadequate, unclear or insufficient by mothers, as well as that workers' understanding of some aspects of the technology process was lacking. Parents' perceptions are also influenced by the opinions of the healthcare personnel providing the information. It seems that the specialization of professionals, religion, sex, the number of children they have and ethnic origin can influence the information they transmit and, consequently, the choices offered to parents. The complexity of genetics combined with the notion of risk makes the information provided even more difficult for parents to understand, especially when they are vulnerable and anxious when faced with an important decision about their child. The waiting period before obtaining the results and the uncertainty regarding them are a source of stress and anxiety for prospective parents. Risks Non-invasive screening tests are safe for the mother and fetus. However this is not the case with invasive diagnostics. Invasive diagnostic tests can detect numerous genetic conditions caused by imperfections in a gene or chromosome. They can indicate the existence of a genetic problem with high accuracy, but some diagnostic tests are risky and can lead to miscarriage. The pregnant woman is at risk, both physically and psychologically, during the testing process. Even if the probability of miscarriage is low, it is still present. This possibility of fetal loss also includes healthy fetuses that could have been born alive and well if the diagnostic test had not been performed (Health and Commissioner, 2008, 20). In conclusion, the implementation of the test can give a final result that people in the medical world; parents; family members and people in society actually want to prevent this from happening. Consequentialism indicates that an act is morally permissible if and only if (and because) it promotes as much good, impartially considered, as any other available act of action. This technology that makes it possible to accidentally terminate a pregnancy is not acceptable because it does not promote good, instead it carries the risk of death of the child. The death of a perfectly healthy fetus is a huge risk that can have several negative side effects on the parents (emotionally and also health-wise for the mother). From this we can say that this technology is absolutely unacceptable. Pressure from society Every individual should have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether they want children or not. Despite the contrary, the perceptions of prospective parents are influenced by society's perceptions. The choice of parents, whether or not to undergo the diagnostic test that could lead to the decision to keep the child, is a reflection of social currents, for example the state of mind of thesociety towards disabled people and its thought of 'normality'. In general, prenatal diagnostic testing takes place in a context of social pressure that can significantly limit parents' freedom of choice. Undergoing a prenatal genetic screening test implies the prior belief that terminating a pregnancy or agreeing to give birth to a genetically disabled fetus are both reasonable choices in our society. This is why using prenatal diagnostic technology is not an option for some people. Individuals have an obligation to evaluate the moral norms of their society, to reject them if they are wrong, and to do the right thing. But as mentioned above, parental understanding can be influenced by a number of different factors ranging from culture to religion, sexual orientation, past experience and, of course, societal pressure. How society deals with prenatal diagnosis will impact social values: moral, legal and ethical perspectives. Societal pressure can have a negative physical and mental influence on prospective parents. If the well-being of parents is negatively affected, then it is not morally permissible to use this technology. Arguments for Moral Permissibility The strongest claims against the permissibility of prenatal screening are outlined in this section. Additionally, counterarguments to these arguments are provided after each argument. The first claim argues that parents should have the right not to have a child if his or her genetic condition would make him or her unable to provide sufficient care. The second claim views the moral issue through a welfare hedonism perspective and argues that optimal overall well-being is achieved whenever the child is not born. Providing Adequate Care When deciding whether prenatal screening is morally permissible, the goodness of the outcome of its use is examined more closely. Although several factors are important in determining this, the well-being of the parents (and consequently the well-being of the child) is examined. An important part of promoting a child's well-being is caring for them and spending time with them. When a couple is expecting a baby, they often reflect on how the baby will affect their lives. Depending on the results, they may make changes to their lifestyle so they can properly care for the baby. However, if after the birth of the child it is discovered that he has a genetic disease, for example Down syndrome, the parents' lives are affected differently than they expected. Although financial support and support from family caregivers is available, parents' lives will still be greatly affected. Not only does it increase the intensity of care these children need, but it also increases its duration. While most children become independent once they grow up, several genetic diseases severely limit or even prevent those affected from becoming independent from their parents. Using prenatal DNA sequencing, genetic diseases of the baby can be identified in the early stages of pregnancy. Having this information would allow parents to make a more informed decision about whether they can care for the child. Allowing parents to have this information will ensure that the child is provided with sufficient care, which will improve their life than they would have without this care. In addition to the life of the child, the life of the parents is also affected. Parents will have fewer (unexpected) compromises to make in their lives.While most parents do this willingly, parents may find themselves in a situation where they are forced to change their lives unexpectedly to provide adequate care for the child. Additionally, having a child with a genetic disorder causes a lot of stress for parents. If the parents had become aware of the genetic disease at an early stage of the pregnancy, they could have made an informed decision whether or not to continue with the pregnancy. Having lower knowledge of the unborn child's genetic condition will allow parents who feel they are unable to provide sufficient care to terminate the pregnancy. Parents have the right to make this informed decision, and the technology that allows them to do so is therefore morally permissible. Equal Opportunity The firstThe above argument states that the information obtained using this technology can be used by parents to make an informed decision about the ability to care for the child. Since this is based on the assumption of how much care the child would need, it is not morally permissible since not all children with Down syndrome need the same care. People have a tendency to consider worst-case scenarios on which to base their decisions when making decisions about issues such as the one described in this topic. Another objection to this argument is that every child should have equal opportunities and the decision whether a child fits the parents' lifestyle should not be based on genetic discrepancies as it gives parents the opportunity to discriminate and use other genetic information to choose. a child who fits their idea of the perfect child. This idea was also published by all participants in the survey carried out in the following article. They agreed that unconditional acceptance of children is the most laudable approach. Another objection raised in this article is the obsession with physical perfection in society. In the future this approach could put even more social pressure on disabled people as it is not one hundred percent accurate and will not mean that disabled children will not be born in the future. This type of decision making based on possibly incorrect information and assumptions about a child's life should therefore not be allowed. Child welfare An argument in favor of this technology based on the well-being of the child and parents will be considered. Suppose a woman is pregnant and the test results show that the baby has a genetic disease. The birth may be less favorable due to the fact that the child may suffer and have a low quality of life due to disabilities. Looking at this situation from the point of view of welfare hedonism, according to which well-being depends exclusively on the presence of happiness/enjoyment and the absence of pain/suffering, could lead to the conclusion that in this situation it would be more favorable if the child were not born, then it would promote maximum total well-being for this situation. Under these conditions, the information provided by the prenatal test can be important for the outcome of this scenario and an argument It can be said that the information provided by this technology has the potential to make well-informed decisions leading to a situation with an overall increase of well-being. This situation, therefore, demonstrates that it should be allowed to use prenatal diagnosis technology to gather information that has the potential to lead to a situation of greater well-being. Theories on the mental state It is argued that a genetically disabled child not being born can lead to a situation of maximum general well-being, 1095-5054.