Them’s Fighting Words 2: Genetic Testing, Prenatal
May 17, 2006 by Kristina Chew, PhD
Filed under Health
To the list of fighting words, add
- genetic testing
- prenatal
A few days ago, I posted about a genetic test for autism. As Hsien at Genetics and Health posted, “not all genetic tests are prenatal.” The genetic test I mentioned, Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA), is not a prenatal genetic test for autism.
There are links on the CMA webpage for other kinds of prenatal CMA tests. There is no such test, yet.
The advantages of knowing your yet-to-be-born child will be autistic?
Parents could start to figure out what kinds of services and treatment and therapies would best help their child.
Parents could decide not to have the child—and that is the disadvantage (to understate the matter) of a prenatal genetic test for autism. Autistic Bitch from Hell wrote
Joseph commented on Kristina’s site that the “next fight” in the struggle for the human rights of autistic people has begun. Other bloggers such as elmindreda have described these times as the Last Day, the final battle for survival, Tarmon Gai’don, Armageddon. We knew that it was coming. Most of us didn’t expect it to happen this soon.
Read the rest at Next Fight, or Last Day.
Parents could decide not to have the child—and that is the disadvantage (to understate the matter)
That’s right. And I can’t emphasize this enough. It’s true that it’s a moral issue, but it goes beyond this. This kind of thing can get out of hand. Pretty soon only “normal” (typical, average) people will be allowed to be born, or only people with certain desirable traits. Artificial selection of human traits is not a good idea by any means. Tampering with nature is dangerous stuff and could easily be catastrophic. I don’t want to be melodramatic, but we’re really talking about the potential extinction of the species.
If the science is going to happen, it’s vitally important to discuss the potential implications of new knowledge and technology, so that proper ethical guidelines can be put in place. Better to have the discussion now than when it’s too late.
And of course, letting people know what Life With Autism is REALLY like — as many bloggers are attempting to do — will help discourage people from trying to use technology and biological understanding to the detriment of the species.
The future desperately needs diversity: of thought, of body, of ideology. If anyone attempts to homogenize the human race, I have a strong feeling that the human race won’t last very long.
Thanks for the link.
Are you certain that the test is not yet being used as a prenatal test for autism? That website didn’t look as if it made a clear statement one way or the other.
Based on the “Autism Every Day” video and following the response to it, it seems to me that the general public’s perception of autism is not exactly positive—the great sadnesss cited by some of the mothers was that their kids would not, could “never be able” to do “normal” things, like getting married, dancing with a bride, etc.. The struggle ahead seems to me to involve showing that the “real autism every day” is not the “devastation” portrayed in the video and promoted by Autism Speaks.
Joseph, I agree, this is a moral issue and something beyond that. And it looks like this science IS happening and we need to get this discussion into as many ears as possible.
Thanks for the thanks, abfh—-Dr. Lei at geneticsandhealth.com is contacting Baylor School of Medicine to ask about that. I do think the website–just by the way it is set up–suggests that the test, or some other genetic test, could be used to prenatally test for autism.