catapult magazine

Case: A woman undergoes prenatal genetic testing and finds out that the baby she carries has Down syndrome connected to a genetic disorder known as a Robertsonian Translocation. This condition is traced back and they discover that she is a carrier for the Robertsonian Translocation which greatly increases the odds of further children being effected. The woman is overcome with a sense of embracement and does not want anyone to know of her status as a carrier. However, the woman has a brother who is planning a marriage for the summer. The information we know of his sister increases the odds that he is also a carrier for this genetic condition which then increases the odds of his offspring having Down syndrome. Should her brother be informed of this possibility which would require disclosing information about his sister without her consent, or should the confidentiality of his sister be maintained?

Do we have individual right to our DNA or do we share it with our families?

True enough. I just don’t think cloning is necessary or desirable. So if somebody could demonstrate to me how cloning could make the world a better place, how it could make people happier, and how it could be of benefit to the cloned being itself, I’m open to ideas.

Because at this point the only logic I’ve been exposed to, in which cloning makes sense, is the logic of big business. And if something is good for big business, it does not necessarily follow that it is good (as I think we all know).

I wish I could say that deafening silence is a stunning revelation that cloning will primarily serve the interests of corporations and their shareholders. More likely, however, nobody is reading this conversation. Where are all the progressophiles when you need them? Are we all gene-ally conservative?

Now this definetly poses an interesting conundrum. Should we be obligated or should the doctor be obligated to disclose this type of information or should it purely be taken from an ethical standpoint. Since no crime has been committed by law she is under no obligation nor is the doctor. However, from an ethical point of view you would say that she is. On a personal level I would immediately inform my brother (or in my case, my sister) of the possbility of being a carrier of this disease. No matter if I think he/she would be swayed by this information. Even in adoption cases it is possible to gain medical information on the birth parents. So my opinion is that although not obligated by law, she is obligated through her morality to disclose this information to her brother and /or her brothers financee`/wife.

~Heidi C. Saunders