The Human Genome Project and the related research and development activities have raised heated discussions around some very basic ethical and social issues. A much debated concern is that of justice in human genetic research and in possible applications, especially pertaining to questions of just benefit-sharing -who and based on what sort of argumentation has the right to require benefits arising from research and discoveries, and what can even be considered as benefits? In what follows I will be examining and clarifying the notion of benefit-sharing by focusing on its justifications. I will argue for certain qualifications and limitations in using this concept in specific and universal contexts.

Background Osteogenesis Imperfecta (OI) is a rare genetic disorder involving bone fragility. OI patients typically suffer from numerous fractures, skeletal deformities, shortness of stature and hearing loss. The disorder is characterised by genetic and clinical heterogeneity. Pathogenic variants in more than 20 different genes can lead to OI, and phenotypes can range from mild to lethal forms. As a genetic disorder which undoubtedly affects quality of life, OI significantly alters the reproductive confidence of families at risk. The current review describes a selection of the latest reproductive approaches which may be suitable for prospective parents faced with a risk of OI. The aim of the review is to alleviate suffering in relation to family planning around OI, by enabling prospective parents to make informed and independent decisions. Main body The current review provides a comprehensive overview of possible reproductive options for people with OI and for unaffected carriers of OI pathogenic genetic variants. The review considers reproductive options across all phases of family planning, including pre-pregnancy, fertilisation, pregnancy, and post-pregnancy. Special attention is given to the more modern techniques of assisted reproduction, such as preconception carrier screening, preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic diseases and non-invasive prenatal testing. The review outlines the methodologies of the different reproductive approaches available to OI families and highlights their advantages and disadvantages. These are presented as a decision tree, which takes into account the autosomal dominant and autosomal recessive nature of the OI variants, and the OI-related risks of people without OI. The complex process of decision-making around OI reproductive options is also discussed from an ethical perspective. Conclusion The rapid development of molecular techniques has led to the availability of a wide variety of reproductive options for prospective parents faced with a risk of OI. However, such options may raise ethical concerns in terms of methodologies, choice management and good clinical practice in reproductive care, which are yet to be fully addressed.

The expression “common good” usually conjures up benevolent associations: it is something to be desired, a worthy goal, and it would be a brave person who declared he or she was against the common good. Yet modern times have taught us to be critical and even suspicious of such grand rhetoric, leading us to query what lies behind this ambitious notion, who formulates what it stands for, and how such formulations have been reached.

No abstract

BACKGROUND With the help of ART, an advanced parental age is not considered to be a serious obstacle for reproduction anymore. However, significant health risks for future offspring hide behind the success of reproductive medicine for the treatment of reduced fertility associated with late parenthood. Although an advanced maternal age is a well-known risk factor for poor reproductive outcomes, understanding the impact of an advanced paternal age on offspring is yet to be elucidated. De novo monogenic disorders (MDs) are highly associated with late fatherhood. MDs are one of the major sources of paediatric morbidity and mortality, causing significant socioeconomic and psychological burdens to society. Although individually rare, the combined prevalence of these disorders is as high as that of chromosomal aneuploidies, indicating the increasing need for prenatal screening. With the help of advanced reproductive technologies, families with late paternity have the option of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for multiple MDs (MD-NIPT), which has a sensitivity and specificity of almost 100%. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The main aims of the current review were to examine the effect of late paternity on the origin and nature of MDs, to highlight the role of NIPT for the detection of a variety of paternal age-associated MDs, to describe clinical experiences and to reflect on the ethical concerns surrounding the topic of late paternity and MD-NIPT. SEARCH METHODS An extensive search of peer-reviewed publications (1980–2021) in English from the PubMed and Google Scholar databases was based on key words in different combinations: late paternity, paternal age, spermatogenesis, selfish spermatogonial selection, paternal age effect, de novo mutations (DNMs), MDs, NIPT, ethics of late fatherhood, prenatal testing and paternal rights. OUTCOMES An advanced paternal age provokes the accumulation of DNMs, which arise in continuously dividing germline cells. A subset of DNMs, owing to their effect on the rat sarcoma virus protein–mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling pathway, becomes beneficial for spermatogonia, causing selfish spermatogonial selection and outgrowth, and in some rare cases may lead to spermatocytic seminoma later in life. In the offspring, these selfish DNMs cause paternal age effect (PAE) disorders with a severe and even life-threatening phenotype. The increasing tendency for late paternity and the subsequent high risk of PAE disorders indicate an increased need for a safe and reliable detection procedure, such as MD-NIPT. The MD-NIPT approach has the capacity to provide safe screening for pregnancies at risk of PAE disorders and MDs, which constitute up to 20% of all pregnancies. The primary risks include pregnancies with a paternal age over 40 years, a previous history of an affected pregnancy/child, and/or congenital anomalies detected by routine ultrasonography. The implementation of NIPT-based screening would support the early diagnosis and management needed in cases of affected pregnancy. However, the benefits of MD-NIPT need to be balanced with the ethical challenges associated with the introduction of such an approach into routine clinical practice, namely concerns regarding reproductive autonomy, informed consent, potential disability discrimination, paternal rights and PAE-associated issues, equity and justice in accessing services, and counselling. WIDER IMPLICATIONS Considering the increasing parental age and risks of MDs, combined NIPT for chromosomal aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes as well as tests for MDs might become a part of routine pregnancy management in the near future. Moreover, the ethical challenges associated with the introduction of MD-NIPT into routine clinical practice need to be carefully evaluated. Furthermore, more focus and attention should be directed towards the ethics of late paternity, paternal rights and paternal genetic guilt associated with pregnancies affected with PAE MDs.