The Pros And Cons Of Genetic Testing

1. Genetic testing and design has come a long way in a short few decades. From the invasive method of amniocentesis (procedure where the needle must be inserted through mother’s belly and into amniotic sac), fast forward to 2016. Today non-invasive prenatal tests (NIPTs) exist where a mother simply has a blood sample taken from her. It can give a 99% accurate prediction of whether the fetus will have Down Syndrome and it the test can be conducted as early as 9-10 weeks, whereas more invasive methods must wait until 16 weeks or later (Testing Baby’s DNA, Renee). Naturally every parent is concerned with the well-being of their baby and his/her future, therefore I believe that the option of these tests aren’t a bad thing. In fact, I believe that prenatal testing should be covered in all insurance plans regardless of affluence. Every parent deserves the right to know what their child might face and the option to consider if it’s even ethical to continue the pregnancy. And ultimately every parent should hold the right to alter a child’s genetic code if it means eliminating a potentially life-threatening disease that could take the child from this world upon entering it.

For example, I really enjoyed Wendy’s point of view on class division between perfectly modified children vs. naturally born. I’d like to build on that idea by saying that “designer” children could absolutely yield school environments where naturally born kids are bullied for their status of imperfection. Naturally born adults could lose job, loan or insurance opportunities due to discrimination against their special need or the risk of a special need. Therefore, without limitations, genetic testing and engineering absolutely has the potential to foster a new civil