Genetic Testing Persuasive Essay

There are two main ways genetic testing places a constraint on a child’s right to an open future. The first of these is that the revelation of a child’s disease status can change his life narrative and the way parents and others treat him, and substantially alter his or her life’s trajectory (Davis _____). Parents may feel guilty or shelter their not-yet-sick

Basically the article claims that everyone is impacted by genetic testing, either positively or negatively. There are many potential benefits which can arise as a result of genetic testing such as individuals that are identified as carrying potentially harmful genetic alterations can receive regular

It is patients’ right to opt for genetic testing on their own DNA, although they are accepting a great risk by doing so.

   The Human Genome Project is the largest scientific endeavor undertaken since the Manhattan Project, and, as with the Manhattan Project, the completion of the Human Genome Project has brought to surface many moral and ethical issues concerning the use of the knowledge gained from the project. Although genetic tests for certain diseases have been available for 15 years (Ridley, 1999), the completion of the Human Genome Project will certainly lead to an exponential increase in the number of genetic tests available. Therefore, before genetic testing becomes a routine part of a visit to a doctor's office, the two main questions at the heart of the controversy surrounding genetic testing must be

Many medical advances are being made today in the area of genetics. One of the most talked about is prenatal genetic testing. The purpose of prenatal genetic testing is to obtain information on a baby's health before they are born. This new technology will definitely improve the quality of human life. Diseases will be diminished and through new advances some diseases might even be eliminated. Children will be at less risk to have major health problems in their lives adding positively to their life experience. Prenatal genetic testing will also affects society as a whole.

As the number and availability of various genetic tests have grown, so too has a fear among Americans that their genetic information may be used for purposes other than curing or preventing diseases. This paper looks at the law Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act passed in 2008 and how it influences the workplace and the health insurance practices.

When people have a genetic test done, whether it is presymptomatic, prenatal, newborn, or carrier testing, professionals have the ability to access them. This becomes a main concern of those who get genetic tests done because they have the capability of being dropped by their employer or insurance The companies cannot discard a person because of their genetic predispositions, but they can find loopholes to get rid of them legally. Direct-to-Consumer tests, however, cannot be accessed by employers or insurance companies without consent. “Thanks to the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) signed into law in 2008, consumers need not worry about the impacts on their health insurance policy and employee status as a result of pursuing DTC genetic testing” (Su 1). This way, a person can understand their genetic predisposition without the fear of being dropped by an insurance or an employer.“The initial criticism of DTC genetic testing highlighted harms from both advertising of tests and access to tests in the absence of a health care provider intermediary” (Javitt and Hudson 2), but Direct-to-consumer tests remove the fear of outside companies finding out about their susceptibilities to genetic diseases. Many people believe Direct-to-consumer tests can be inaccurate, but with the extensive knowledge of DNA, and what is not discovered, there will be mistakes whether it is done by a medical professional or not.

Results provided through genetic testing enables doctors to be more informed in terms of their patients; allows regular screening practices, or treatment planning at early stages.

This is just my opinion on what I would do about the issues relating genetic testing with the American Society of Human Genetics. If you have an immediate family member with a genetic disease or condition, you should have a blood screening test ran to possibly save you from getting the same

Although the gene chip will enable an individual to know whether he/she has a genetic disease, that person may not want to know the information. Many people are frightened that a positive finding on a genetic test will result in discrimination and ostracism because the society will consider them abnormal (Easthope 2005). The other concern is that with genetic test information one might lose or might be unable to get a job or insurance. There have been concerns that with the knowledge of one’s medical information after a gene test, he/she might suffer a psychological problem especially when the results reveal that one suffers from a terminal disease or has high possibility of suffering from one (Willis 2009).

genetic testing, everything has changed. She notes that clinicians now have the ability to diagnose, treat, and monitor a patient’s illnesses or disease progression in an entirely different manner. This is a far cry from the old medical model of responding to a disease (or defect) only after it appears, and then prescribing the recommended medication or intervention. These genetic medical advances sound miraculous and promising, but the ability to test, screen and provide early intervention does not come without many major ethical dilemmas.

There are many questions that would arise, for example, who would have the rights to the genetic information? There are no uniform standards for genetic testing from state to state. Nor are there strict policies protecting the vulnerable. The current standard is GENA, Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, but it is severely lacking. While GENA protects against employers and health insurance companies requesting genetic test results, it does not cover mortgage lending, housing or schools, life or disability insurance. (U.S Department of Human Services). Before considering mandating genetic testing there should be clear and concise policies in place.

All parents should have the choice to let their child be tested for future health problems and it should not be a law. We do not know what the future truly holds for technology and health issues. The testing of genetics should continue though because of those parents like of Cora, who have given that consent to find future health issues. The people who are in charge of the genetic testing need to inform those that it may not be a 100% accurate, the risks of finding something that has no cure, and the possible future hacking along with genetic

The Goal of the Human Genome Project is to obtain genetic mapping information and to determine the complete sequence of all human DNA by the year of 2005. The project started in 1990 and 180 million dollars are being spent on it annually. This adds up to a total of over 2 billion dollars for the 15 year budget. Of this 2 billion dollars budgeted, 5% is spent annually on the ethical, legal and social issues. This report focused on some of these issues.

I fully support these laws because I am against genetic discrimination. Many risks could be poised if genetic discrimination was legal. First of all, it is invasion of privacy. Your genetic information is YOUR genetic information. It is not anyone else’s business and you should not be required to make it public. If genetic information was a requirement when applying for a job or health insurance, people could make biased opinions and that almost immediately ends your chance of getting what you applied for. Therefore, people with genetic disabilities would have a hard time facing the discrimination. These people would be lucky to get a job and their health bills would go through the roof. I think that having a disability does not mean you are not able to be a reliable worker, and it also doesn’t necessarily mean your health will be significantly impacted. Besides, it is wrong to discriminate against people just because of who they are! In addition, genetic discrimination does not promote equal opportunities. For example, in Hong Kong three men were denied the opportunity in being in the disciplined forces (law enforcement) because a parent had schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is a mental