The new gene technology and the difference between getting rid of illness and altering people.

Abstract

With the possibility of gene therapy on the horizon in the case of illnesses such as cystic fibrosis, it is probable that some parents, who in the past would have chosen prenatal diagnosis with a view to selective abortion (Royal College of Physicians 1989), in the future will chose neonatal or prenatal diagnosis with a view to gene treatment, should their child be affected by a treatable genetic illness. This is welcome news not only for those who view abortion as an act of homicide, but also for many prospective parents of a different outlook. The possibility of treatment would spare many women (who might otherwise have contemplated the possibility of abortion) the agonising choice between going through the ordeal of having an abortion and loosing a child or giving birth to a child facing a life, the length and quality of which would to be affected by illness and suffering. Whatever their outlook, for couples who are aware that they are at increased risk of having a child affected by a certain disease, the possibility of treating such a child will certainly make the decision to embark on pregnancy easier. However, the new techniques could be used not only to heal the individual child or young person but also in such ways that they would have hereditary consequences affecting future generations. The new techniques could even be used to alter personal traits which have nothing to do with disease. These new possibilities might have important and far-reaching consequences for ourselves, our children and society at large. Our new-found skills might foster a consumer attitude towards children, an attitude which selective abortion is already encouraging (Sutton 1992). They might promote a society with a distinctly eugenic outlook (Sutton 1990, 45-48; 125-126).