From R.E.Robles-Thome
I was pleased to see the issues of pre-implantation diagnosis (PGD) aired at
last in your article
(11 December, p 18),
but I was a little sad that it was
painted as a dangerous technology, rather than a great opportunity.
Why should a woman, having gone through a draining sequence of procedures to
harvest eggs for IVF, not be allowed to choose embryos for implantation on the
basis of all information which can be obtained by PGD?
All of the embryos will be her natural children, and she will have the
privilege of being able to choose between them. What gives anyone the right to
say that informed choice must not be available? The logic that says that she
must accept a random choice is like that which says that she must not have the
choice of abortion, or the choice of controlling her fertility through
contraception. She is her own person, not a vessel for others’ views on what is
right, still less for God playing dice.
Further, if this technology could reduce the incidence of, say, dementia in
old age, the economic benefits could be huge. Unfashionable though it may be, I
look forward to society seizing these opportunities, and all the benefits that
might accrue.
Advertisement
Edinburgh
