Is there an ethical difference between preimplantation genetic diagnosis and abortion?

Abstract

When a person at risk of having a child with a genetic illness or disease wishes to have an unaffected child, this can involve difficult choices. If the pregnancy is established by sexual intercourse, the fetus can be tested early in pregnancy, and if affected a decision can be made to abort in the hope that a future pregnancy with an unaffected fetus ensures. Alternatively, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) can be used after in vitro fertilisation (IVF) to select and implant an unaffected embryo that hopefully will proceed to term and produce a healthy baby. We are aware that many individuals at risk regard the latter as ethically more acceptable than the former, and examine whether there is an ethical difference between these options. We conclude that PGD and implantation of an unaffected embryo is a more acceptable choice ethically than prenatal diagnosis (PND) followed by abortion for the following reasons:Choice after PGD is seen as ethically neutral because a positive result (“a healthy pregnancy”) balances a negative result (“the destruction of the affected embryo”) simultaneously (assuming the pregnancy proceeds to full term and a healthy baby is born). While there is usually the intention to establish a healthy pregnancy after an abortion, this is not simultaneous;A woman sees abortion as a personal physical violation of her integrity, and as the pregnancy proceeds she increasingly identifies with and gives ethical status to the embryo/fetus as it develops in utero and not in the laboratory;Many people see aborting a fetus as “killing”, whereas in the case of PGD the spare embryos are “allowed to die”. We argue that this difference of opinion gives further weight to our conclusion, but note that this has been addressed and debated at length by others.

Factors associated with preimplantation genetic diagnosis acceptance among women concerned about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

“…They conclude that the public sees abortion of a fetus as "killing," whereas in PGD, unused embryos are "allowed to die." 24 Those individuals who viewed PGD more in the context of religion as opposed to factors such as affordability, cost, safety, and health were less likely to accept PGD. Little research has been conducted regarding patient religion and use of PGD; however, the topic has been explored in the context of prenatal diagnosis.…”

Parents' dilemmas and decision making on the outcome of pregnancy after prenatal diagnoses of fetal anomalies

“…Zastupnici prava osoba sa ometenošću smatraju da upotreba tehnika prenatalne dijagnostike diskriminiše osobe sa ometenošću iz više razloga, uključujući i taj da se njihovi životi ne vrednuju jednako kao životi ljudi tipične populacije (Cameron, Williamson, 2003). Oni uglavnom navode da je i samo prenatalno testiranje moralno problematično zato što promoviše negativne stavove prema ovim osobama, bazira se na pogrešnim prtepostavkama o nižem kvalitetu njihovih života i vođeno je nastojanjem da se smanje troškovi brige o ovoj populaciji (Dixon, 2008).…”

Diagnóstico pré-natal das genodermatoses

“…Assim, evita-se a realização de procedimento invasivo na gestação. Além disso, essa técnica tem a grande vantagem de dispensar a interrupção da gestação, o que a torna um método eticamente mais aceitável para muitos casais, 37 além de não ser ilegal no Brasil. As principais desvantagens são o elevado custo, a possibilidade de resultado falso-negativo, o estresse emocional e os riscos envolvi- …”