Ivf Treatment - Is It Right?
- Submitted by: abigham
- Views: 1406
- Category: Politics
- Date Submitted: 01/29/2010 01:35 AM
- Pages: 7
- Report this Essay
Bioethics Essay:
The Relevance of An Embryo's Status as Concerns IVF and Genetic Testing
Modern reproductive strategies such as in-vitro fertilization and prenatal genetic testing are
intimately connected with how policies are generated, from state to state, due to the perception of
the embryo's 'moral status'. Interestingly, although most policies take into account how embryos
are perceived and treated, and how parents of the embryos fit into the process, as some feminist
bioethicists have opined, less emphasis seems to be placed on the overall status of women, which
such strategies annually chisel in our society.
Some right-winged scientists, theologians, and politicians might opine that the embryo should be
perceived as a human subject, post-fertilization. As such, it should be afforded the same rights as
a baby, a child, or an adult, the right to survive. Therefore, both parents and clinicians are
ethically obliged not to engage in practices (e.g., freezing and research) that could potentially
harm the embryo. Interestingly, however, such freezing methods are employed with the embryos,
around the time they reach the eight-celled stage (48-72 hours post-conception). However, it is
the later, blastocyst stage, which allows embryos to be implanted into the uterine lining. Freezing
embryos at the cellular level, therefore, is actually as safe as the implantation process itself,
which always carries its risks. Additionally, the risks to the embryo are probably not greater than
the risks of 'natural' conception and implantation.
Such right-winged opponents also believe that since the embryo's rights as a human subject (to
survive) should outweigh other measures, prenatal (e.g., in-utero) genetic testing should be
exercised only to target serious disease, and not if doing so would harm the fetus (regardless of
the health implications for the mother). Additionally, such conservatives generally remain
excessively opposed to some...
The Relevance of An Embryo's Status as Concerns IVF and Genetic Testing
Modern reproductive strategies such as in-vitro fertilization and prenatal genetic testing are
intimately connected with how policies are generated, from state to state, due to the perception of
the embryo's 'moral status'. Interestingly, although most policies take into account how embryos
are perceived and treated, and how parents of the embryos fit into the process, as some feminist
bioethicists have opined, less emphasis seems to be placed on the overall status of women, which
such strategies annually chisel in our society.
Some right-winged scientists, theologians, and politicians might opine that the embryo should be
perceived as a human subject, post-fertilization. As such, it should be afforded the same rights as
a baby, a child, or an adult, the right to survive. Therefore, both parents and clinicians are
ethically obliged not to engage in practices (e.g., freezing and research) that could potentially
harm the embryo. Interestingly, however, such freezing methods are employed with the embryos,
around the time they reach the eight-celled stage (48-72 hours post-conception). However, it is
the later, blastocyst stage, which allows embryos to be implanted into the uterine lining. Freezing
embryos at the cellular level, therefore, is actually as safe as the implantation process itself,
which always carries its risks. Additionally, the risks to the embryo are probably not greater than
the risks of 'natural' conception and implantation.
Such right-winged opponents also believe that since the embryo's rights as a human subject (to
survive) should outweigh other measures, prenatal (e.g., in-utero) genetic testing should be
exercised only to target serious disease, and not if doing so would harm the fetus (regardless of
the health implications for the mother). Additionally, such conservatives generally remain
excessively opposed to some...