What if you could know your all about your baby's DNA before birth? All without any invasive or risky testing. This incredible procedure was done for the first time with over 90 percent accuracy by researchers at the University of Washington. They took a blood sample from mom and the saliva from dad and put together a near-total genome sequence of the fetus, possibly making thousands of genetic diseases known before baby is born. With more research and cost cutting, this could mean no more need for amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling.
But it also raises a lot of ethical questions. If this becomes an easy test, would this change more parents' decision to have a baby with a potential genetic disease? Would this open the door to genetically modified babies? I'm a bit worried about what this all could mean.
Of course, it really depends on what you believe. But with this DNA construction, the testing could be done at 8 weeks gestation, opposed to 16 weeks when women can get an amnio. Earlier detection, more time to prepare? Or choose another route? It's still not feasible for most though as currently this new procedure is not only extremely expensive -- $50,000 -- but the results take a month to receive. Still, they are in the early stages of development with hopes of a faster turnaround and for a price that most can afford.
If I'm looking on the bright side, perhaps it could help give more insight into genetic diseases and lead to positive outcomes. But what if it enables some to go beyond selectively aborting a fetus because of a genetic defect. What if people want a designer child, say a boy with blond hair, and the testing reveals that it was a girl with brown hair, would this make people abort the fetus in order to try again to create their "perfect" baby. Further down the road, if more medical advancements were made, could this lead to researchers being able to genetically modify fetuses?
There was once a time when the Internet didn't exist. So we can't think something like this couldn't happen. I'm not sure how to feel. Scared. Happy. Concerned.
One of the comments on the CNN article on the topic made me think. "winema" said: "Having a handicap child would probably prevent them from having more children, so we are actually saving lives of the fetus siblings. Also parents who have genetic disorders now are very likely to remain childless, because they afraid that child will inherit their condition, but with this technology we give them hope, so they can try to have a healthy child. So again, we are saving healthy child life by telling parents if he has genetic problem or not."
Isn't our current genetic testing enough? Do we need to know every possibility beforehand? Could we go overboard with the information? What if it says your child may have a heart condition at some point, would that change a parent's mind into not wanting that child? Even if it's something that may not happen? Even if it's something that can be treated?
In our hearts as parents, we know what we can or can't handle. And the decision to have a baby is a big one, whether or not that child is healthy or not. We make our decisions based on that. At least I'd like to think so.
But where is the line drawn? It definitely gives us a lot to think about it. There are more questions than answers.
Is this procedure something to fear or a positive step for potential prevention? Would you want to get this type of testing done during pregnancy?
Image via Spec-ta-cles/Flickr


This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
This Hot Dad Wants to Cook You Dinner
This Hot Dad Cooks AND Does the Dishes
Kanye West is Gay?!
















Comments 49
Gattaca!
This test isn't going to keep people with genetic diseases from having kids. Almost all people with genetic diseases have the strong desire to have children just like other people. Children with genetic diseases like hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, cystic fibrosis, CVID that would have never survived to be reproductive age are now actually growing up and having children.
My children (32,29,&24) have CVID, a rare genetic immune deficiency disease. No one is really working on a cure because it is so rare but it may be curable in 5 or 10 years when they figure out how to cure some other immune disease (even an autoimmune disease). So should my children not have children or abort children with CVID when it is reasonable to believe that they will be able to cure genetic diseases in the near future. Right now it is treatable. However it is a painful, horrible disease. Only 64% survive to age 20.
One of my sons decided to have children. His oldest son is 3 and has CVID. They have a 3 month old baby and the the tests can't be done until around 12 months. My other two sons had vasectomies. One is sure he doesn't want children. The other doesn't think he wants children but thinks if he does he can go to a sperm bank and get better sperm.
I both like and dispise this. If you have a history of genetic disease and you could know if your child is going to suffer I think you have the right to know and make your own decision, or just to be prepared. I'm not saying I agree at all with chosing to abort your child, just that if there was a way to know before hand I would want to know. To know what to expect, to find the support or even to find someone capable of giving the child the care it needs.
I really dipise this because it will be abused.
When I was expecting my son I had no idea what gender I was expecting (He always had his legs crossed during the ultrasounds) and I never even thought of hair or eye colour. So you can imagine my surprise when out came a gorgeous red head blue eyed boy. (I'm a brunette and my fiance is a extremly dark brunette.)
4mutts wins the award for being awesome! i am with you on what you say
I think it's a good idea, If I was a parent who A. had a genetic disease and B. had $50,000 EXTRA (because insurance sure wouldn't cover this one) then yes I would want to know ahead of time so I can be prepared for what is to come.
I'm personally pro-choice but abortion just isn't for me, but to each their own. I wouldn't want to know really anything except genetic issues and the sex anyways. Also at that stage if someone got the test at 8 weeks they would be at least 12 weeks along by the time they could get an abortion anyways and isn't that around the second stage of abortion which I believe (don't quote me) is more risky and takes 2 days?
Ps. obviously "unconditional love" is not a given...If you watch the news you would know that, plenty of parents don't give a rats @ss about their kids and maim them, beat them and torture them. However I highly doubt those people even wanted kids to begin with nor do I think they have an extra $50,000 in their back pocket. Only people with that amount of extra money would be able to do this anyways and I can bet that 1% of the population isn't going to drastically change the abortion rate.