Repairing Embryos

[Nicollle]

I was reading about a process that fixes embryos with birth defects rather than discarding them. It was a called a Trisomy rescue. While most embryos with Trisomy 18 or 21 are discarded, this process removes the extra chromosone that causes the defect. Since there are currently a lot of embryos stored in fertility clinics because of these ailments. Is giving them this treatment morally acceptable?

 

[Doc2be]

I was reading about a process that fixes embryos with birth defects rather than discarding them. It was a called a Trisomy rescue. While most embryos with Trisomy 18 or 21 are discarded, this process removes the extra chromosone that causes the defect. Since there are currently a lot of embryos stored in fertility clinics because of these ailments. Is giving them this treatment morally acceptable?

This is not morally acceptable just because it is a slippery slope to “designer babies” and because how far removed from God’s plan must we move in order to save IVF children? By this last clause I mean how far can we go in “taking over” creation before we truly become our own God? Before we start trying to make new life with out God?

Some people will get the idea to start adding/deleting chromosomes at will to make their “perfect” baby. I can see no way to justify this against the Gospel or any teaching of the Church.

Another thing that you may be thinking of is that it is better to “save” these children from disease/death than have them be killed. At what cost is this procedure “saving” them. Not only does this show how un-accepting people are of those with disabilities, but it also shows a complete disregard for God’s creation. It is almost as if we are saying, “God you didn’t do so hot on this kid…we are going to do it over.” Since we figured out how to “play” God with IVF, we have started to push the limits beyond their breaking point.

I do not agree with killing/letting these embryo’s die, but I can see no way to justify genetically altering them just so they may be accepted by their parents. This is an outcome of 2 people taking God out the picture and substituting science and false-hope.

I can not see this being morally justified, IMHO.

 

[Newbie2]

I disagree with the previous post, in that it is an immoral practice. I do agree, however, that this ***could ***be a step toward the slippery slope toward designer children, which IMHO would be morally unacceptable.

I also agree that IVF is a can of worms that we have opened.

I would pose the question, what is the difference between genetic manipulation in this case and genetic manipulation (if this could ever be done in the future) of an embryo that had a gene alteration that would develop into, say, an atrial septal defect in the heart, which would require the baby to have open heart surgery sometime after birth?

Or, taking another approach, kids born with cleft palates or cleft lips? Isn’t surgery to fix these problems “show(ing) how un-accepting people are of those with disabilities, (and) also show(ing) a complete disregard for God’s creation”?

In other words, where do we draw the line in correcting pathology?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

2275 “One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival.”
“It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material.”

“Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity” which are unique and unrepeatable.

This is from the CCC.

Obviously IVF is not licit. If these procedures become possible to perform on an embryo in-utero we have a different story.

The first part of the quote speaks about improving health or survival. I believe trisomy 18 is often fatal, an extra chromosome is present that should not be there. If that chromosome is removed and the baby can be saved it could be licit.

The second part of the quote speaks about influencing chromosomal or genetic inheritance.
Does inheritance mean traits that come from mom or dad like eye color, height etc? I don’t know if the trisomy’s are inherited traits or if they are spontaneous defects that could be repaired.

Currently 90% of babies with Down’s syndrome are aborted. Down’s is a trisomy. If by removing the extra chromosome, perhaps all those babies wouldn’t be aborted.

I don’t know what the right answer is. I don’t know if the desire for a baby with Down’s syndrome to not have Down’s is asking for a designer baby. There are so many health problems associated with Down’s…I guess to want to remove those health problems would be noble.

I don’t know.

 

[Nicollle]

This is from the CCC.

Obviously IVF is not licit. If these procedures become possible to perform on an embryo in-utero we have a different story.

The first part of the quote speaks about improving health or survival. I believe trisomy 18 is often fatal, an extra chromosome is present that should not be there. If that chromosome is removed and the baby can be saved it could be licit.

The second part of the quote speaks about influencing chromosomal or genetic inheritance.
Does inheritance mean traits that come from mom or dad like eye color, height etc? I don’t know if the trisomy’s are inherited traits or if they are spontaneous defects that could be repaired.

Currently 90% of babies with Down’s syndrome are aborted. Down’s is a trisomy. If by removing the extra chromosome, perhaps all those babies wouldn’t be aborted.

I don’t know what the right answer is. I don’t know if the desire for a baby with Down’s syndrome to not have Down’s is asking for a designer baby. There are so many health problems associated with Down’s…I guess to want to remove those health problems would be noble.

I don’t know.

I don’t think not wanting your child to have Downs or Trisomy 18 is wanting a designer baby. Both can lead to serious health problems or disability. Curing a child of it would be helping them. Wanting a designer baby would be choosing blue eyes or or curly hair, as having brown eyes or straight hair are not defects that cause objective problems.

 

[JanetF]

Correcting genetic problems that cause serious conditions is not creating designer babies.

Cleft palates can often inhibit infant feeding. In third world countries babies who have cleft palates can die without treatment. Yes the treatment makes them appear physicially better, but that’s not necessarily the primary goal of operating on the child. Down’s syndrome children often have associated medical problems that can affect the quality of life.

Spina bifida can be treated in-utero by surgery wherein the surgeon opens the mother’s uterus, takes the baby out, corrects the problem and puts the baby back in. Babies can go on to full gestation and normal delivery. This is not creating designer babies, this is using the talent given to a person by God, to help another human being live a better quality of life.