3 person IVF, unethical or a blessing?.

[margaret*e]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23079276

[023mjc]

Far too much  mucking about with nature. The word Frankenstien comes to mind.

[10phizz]

But for those who cannot have their own child because of passing on a dreadful illness, a blessing surely ? No-one would ever enter into such a serious course of action lightly. We cannot judge anyone else unless we have personal experience of their circumstances.

[kiss*my*pixel]

Frankenstein would surely only spring to mind if a monster were being created?

If this type of treatment could help desperate childless couples have a healthy baby, then brilliant. If life-threatening, painful conditions could be eradicated before they happen, then this can only surely be a good thing?

[margaret*e]

This lady would think it was a blessing, but too late for her sadly.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23095000

[mitzigirl_123]

If there is any risk of passing a genetic disease to a child then the parents should not even consider having children. 

[kiss*my*pixel]

That lady would benefit from it now, but as you say, Marg, too late for her. I don't understand, however, why she went on to have seven children, knowing that this risk was hanging over their heads. Why on earth would any sensible, caring, loving people put either themselves or their child(ren) through the agony and heartache that this situation would almost surely bring?

[sir_arthur_strebe-grebling]

If there is any risk of passing a genetic disease to a child then the parents should not even consider having children.

Very touchy subject because there is a 'community' of 'British' people who deliberately marry close relatives and are 13 times more likely to have children with genetic defects.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2008/2/11/minister-warns-of-cousin-marriage-birth-defec

[kiss*my*pixel]

That could also be said of our dear Royal Family - probably why they are just lately welcoming commoners newcomers into the fold ?

[Anonymous]

These kind of things always create a lot of controversy, but unless you walk a mile in someone else's shoes I don't think you should judge or condemn anyone for wanting a healthy child.

It's easy to say, "I would not do that or I would not have children" etc..., but when faced with the situation you might have a change of heart.

For instance....in the past I was never sure about donor transplants. I wasn't against it, but also not really for it. I sat on the fence on that one............Until my grand daughter's only real chance might have been a heart transplant, although it would have been a slim one as she was born with half a heart.

She died in April this year, age 10 months.

It changed my view on things.

My niece had IVF treatment as her husband has a genetic eye problem that is passed on to boys and will eventually make them blind. They were desperate to have children, but were scared in the case they would have a boy. With the help of a donor they have now to healthy children, a boy and a girl.

[kiss*my*pixel]

Ohh, Harry - sorry to hear of your dear little granddaughter, that is so incredibly sad.

This is precisely why new treatments should be welcomed. If life-threatening or massively debilitating illnesses/conditions/diseases can be eradicated, then these new steps into science and medicine can only be for the good.

So whilst some might think doctors and scientists are playing "God", some think it is for the betterment of humankind. Even if to lessen the suffering of someone born with painful and debilitating conditions.

I cannot begin to imagine the sorrow of losing a child. Unthinkable.

[cee-dee]

#9, How absolutely heartbreaking.

I think that eventually the whole DNA/genome sequences will be identified, that is, the "mixtures" that might cause problems and also the known "defects" can be eliminated if the parents-to-be so wish.

The objectors need some case histories to study?

[Anonymous]

Thanks guys Kiss, thanks CD. :-x

You know, I was just thinking this....We all say we want a better world, a world of peace, a world without hunger, a world without war and a world without illness. Then some specialists are doing their best to try to eradicate some illnesses and people start to complain that scientists should not play God. So what DO they want? Suffering? Condemning others to have no children or no healthy children? Do they want illnesses to continue. Don't they want well-being for everyone? Don't we all have the right to be healthy?

Just a thought.

[mitzigirl_123]

I'm so sorry Harry :-x

[cee-dee]

Someone said that the procedure was like changing the battery in a laptop and after understanding what the procedure involves, they were right, I agree with them.

Remembering it simply, what they're proposing to do is to retain the nucleus of the cell from both parents (which retains the individuality of both parents) but remove 32 genes which make the cell function/work and replacing them with 32 genes from a donor.

By doing that, they prevent the "faulty" genes from causing the genetic defect(s) they want to eliminate.

[Anonymous]

Thanks Mitz.:-x

We were hoping that medical technology would be able to do something more for her in the future than they can offer at this stage.

So, that's where I'm coming from. By being faced with such a situation you never know how you might change your viewpoint on things, whether it's things like IVF treatments or any other medical interventions and/or new inventions.

[10phizz]

Very touchy subject because there is a 'community' of 'British' people who deliberately marry close relatives and are 13 times more likely to have children with genetic defects.

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2008/2/11/minister-warns-of-cousin-marriage-birth-defec

These problems are not always apparent at birth. In the next bed to my  husband in the Neurological ward was a young  teenaged Asian boy.........he had been an "A" student doing his GCSE`s  and then relapsed into a childlike state. The Specialist found that the last 3 generations he could trace (by interview)  had all been Cousin marriages

Harry, so sorry about your little one. My friend has a grandson with a similar condition whose only hope is a transplant.

My niece and her fiance decided not to have children as he has inherited a neurological condition from his father which starts in the early 60`s. They were so desperate to have a family and finally she had her daughter at age 38......I suppose they weighed up 60 good years against nothing.  We cannot judge others decisions.

[ginap.123]

We took our grandchildren away a few years ago & got chatting to a very large party of Pakistani people. A country very well known for 1st cousin marriages. The party consisted of about 12-14 adults, all related & thier children. There were about 20 children, at least 5 in wheelchairs (2 severely disabled) & at least 5 or 6 more with other disabilities. Sure this ratio of disabilities in one extended family cannot be put down to coincidence.

[Anonymous]

without science, just where would we be now? still living in caves probably. these people that knock advancements in science are those who keep the human race locked, because without advancing we stagnate. if this new treatment stops genetic abnormalities then lets go for it, just think a world without cancer, a world were every one has the best chance at life, a world were we can use science to further our development, but then reality kicks in and the spoilers come out and make a song and dance, its not gods way they scream and shout, then moan why have we no cures for our ailments, maybe if they looked back then they would know why.

[lhasa.two]

I have very mixed feelings about this subject and haven't yet made a decision on where I stand on it. My initial reaction is "Eugenics", "designer babies", "pure race" etc. I also don't think it's every woman's right to have children and some certainly shouldn't... but that's another story.

Of course it would be fantastic if certain illnesses were eradicated,  but I do think there is the natural selection process and in some respects I would like it to stay that way and not play around with the gene pool just to suit certain needs people feel they are "entitled" to.

We live in an "entitlement" society it seems but live in a world of total overpopulation. We have orphaned children who need parents so maybe if these people could perhaps put aside their egos and adopt, instead of "selecting" their own unborn children's health then maybe I might be in favour of it it in very very special cases. The example of the woman who lost seven babies and an adult child because SHE wants children, seems incredibly selfish to me.

If you think we all have a right to be healthy then start lobbying third world countries to put their money and aid to better use. Clean water and eradicating malaria might be a good start... You can't have one rule for some and not for others it seems to me.

Donated organs are something we can all participate in if we want to and that's healthy in my view because it can save an existing life, but I'm yet to be convinced about 3 person IVF unless there are very strict guidelines for its use as imagine the abuse of it in the wrong hands.