A deaf British couple wants to have a deaf child via in vitro fertilization. However, a pending bill in Parliament would require fertilization clinics to discard all embryos found to have genes for deafness. Of course, the deaf community is up in arms, accusing the government of implying that deaf people are better off not being born. And it’s hard to disagree with that charge. I’m curious: what other genetic markers are included in the bill’s mandate for automatic disposal? Blindness? Cystic fibrosis? I don’t have a problem with parents choosing which embryos to keep and which to discard, but this bill veers uncomfortably close to government-enforced eugenics.
In the long run, qualms such as mine might be moot. We are approaching a point when genetic manipulation of embryos will be readily available, despite government efforts to impose regulatory controls. As with most things in life, the wealthy will have an easier time accessing these services, while potential parents from more modest economic means will have to take their chances with old-fashioned procreation.
I happened to read an article a few days ago about a new method of harvesting stem cells from embryos, manipulating these cells in such a way that they offer hope for a safe treatment of most genetic diseases. Of course the researchers, like Ria Perlingeiro (from the univ of Campina, Brezil )have a long way ahead of them. But I wonder if their method, if it indeed offered a cure one day, would also appaer to be used by the happy few only, those wo can afford it.