Prenatal genetic screening

**maxx** · January-13-11, 04:15 PM

Taysech's disease has just about become nonexistant because couples had the option to abort fetuses carrying the disease following genetic screening.

http://www.thestar.com/article/92059...netic-diseases
"...it holds out the possibility that many of the most devastating childhood genetic diseases could be largely eradicated in a generation..."

**Johnlodge** · January-13-11, 04:24 PM

Actually, the article refers to parental screening of Tay -Sachs as why occurrences of it have fallen.. It does not declare that "Taysech's disease has just about become nonexistant because couples had the option to abort fetuses". Just for clarification.

In the case of Tay-Sachs, parental screening over the last 40 years has reduced the occurrence of the lethal neurological ailment by 90 per cent.
“That’s been fabulously successful; we’ve seen Tay-Sachs disease almost be eradicated . . . because they did [[the screening) before marriage to see if indeed you were both carriers,” Kingsmore says.

**maxx** · January-13-11, 06:24 PM

So do you suppose those couples where both were carriers just decided not to marry or not to have children?

**Wingnatic** · January-13-11, 07:19 PM

I think genetic screening is a good thing , but I have concerns about it . Lets say if the insurance industry gets ahold of that info , will they deny coverage if a couple decides to have a kid[[s) anyways , or if there is an oopps ? Will health insurance companies in the future require couple to get genetic screening before insuring the couple and any future children . Everyone wants their children to turn out perfectly healthy , but it doesn't always happen . I may have considered the testing 26 years ago when my son was born with Cystic Fibrosis [[both mom and dad have the defective gene that passed it on ) even though we've never had it but it takes 2 carriers and a 1 in 4 chance you'd give your child CF . If we would have known the possible outcome , we would have re-considered having kids especially when we already had a child each before we married [[neither kid has CF )

**maxx** · January-14-11, 11:16 AM

We need laws to protect people from those misuses of this prescreening because we all have seen that just because it's not right doesn't mean people won't do something unless it is illegal. Doing away with most genetic diseases could really make medicine more affordable.

**rb336** · January-14-11, 04:44 PM

I believe in prenatal geriatric testing

**gibran** · January-24-11, 12:15 AM

I agree totally.. quality of life is still an individual choice and education is completely appropriate

**Zacha341** · January-24-11, 03:52 AM

Thank you for pointing out this crucial distinction!

Originally Posted by Johnlodge

Actually, the article refers to parental screening of Tay -Sachs as why occurrences of it have fallen.. It does not declare that "Taysech's disease has just about become nonexistant because couples had the option to abort fetuses". Just for clarification.

gdogslim · January-24-11, 05:59 AM

Testing is good. Do you think the government will eventually force people to have abortions if found they have a socially unacceptable disease or disorder under government forced health care.
Do you think that 'choice' an issue only when it comes to deciding whether someone wants forced health care insurance or only for people who want an abortion?

**jackie5275** · January-24-11, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by gibran

I agree totally.. quality of life is still an individual choice and education is completely appropriate

Education is the key if you know you're going to have a child with some problem. You need to know how to be able to treat it, live with it, and get resources for doing that. The sooner you know if you might encounter such a thing, the more time you'll have to be prepared before the child is born.