Genetic Testing

After this week's lecture, I was intrigued about genetic testing. This is a subject I haven’t really been exposed to yet. It presented many questions that I hadn’t heard before like what the pro and cons are. It was fascinating that we have the technology to know this. The question then becomes: do people want to know in advance if they have a chronic disease or not?  This makes for a sticky situation just like the many others we have talked about in class this semester.

At first I was completely for genetic testing. My reasoning was why wouldn’t you want to know if you had a chronic disease? After reading through some case studies that we talked about in class, it became apparent that people change the way they’re living because they know they’re going to pass-away or pass on some genetic disease to their child. I don’t see why people shouldn’t have the right to choose if they want to get tested to know if the child is going to be a healthy baby or not.  I think that it is a person's right to be allow to have this process done. I have trouble knowing where to draw the line though. If the child is severely sick it would be easier to make the choice to abort, but when it comes to a child with Downs Syndrome I am not sure about that. I have a friend who has Downs Syndrome and I couldn’t imagine him not being alive.  I guess I don’t think children should have to suffer their whole life.

Another point is that I don’t think the government should be the ones who should tell people they can or cannot have children. If I were sick with something that could potentially be passed on to my children I don’t think I could take that chance because I would want them to be healthy. But I can’t speak for everyone else on such a personal decision.  

Blog 7

I was quite curious when I found out that we were going to be talking about abortion in class on this past Tuesday. I had always heard many different opinions on pro life vs. pro choice but I had never discussed it in a classroom setting. I was interested to find out what the different peoples’ views were on the topic. I was surprised to find out there were more than just the black and white version of pro-life vs. pro-choice positions.  Some of these varied views including those by Warren, Thompson, and Marques. Each of these views fascinated me and really opened my eyes to different opinions.  I especially thought that the point that Warren made stating that by the 3^rd trimester the “child” has more rights was quite controversial and more extreme than anything I had ever encountered.  

I have varied thoughts on where I stand when it comes to abortion. Under circumstances such as rape, or when pregnancies are endangering the mother, I feel as though it is hard to not allow those people a choice in such situations. Abortion has correlations to our previous topic of passive and active euthanasia.  Both the case-by-case necessity in decision-making as well as the overall controversial nature of the topic is quite similar to abortion issues. Overall, I found this class discussion enthralling and sparked my curiosity to consider different view points on the topic. 

Blog 6

I had a really hard time in our class discussion when we talked about what is ethical or not ethical when it came to PAS, VPE, VAE.  The interesting part about this discussion was that there were so many different opinion. Some were  based personal experiences, while some were religious based. It is fascinating how this discussion struck different points with people. My group couldn’t decide what was right or not. I kept trying to put myself in those people’s shoes and I just couldn’t. Because it is so hard to see where the line would be drawn, it makes it hard to make a law to allow or not allow. All of them are okay in certain situations.  I think every person should have to have counseling first, and there should be specific guidelines that would have to be followed.  Before learning about this in class I think I would have been more against these practices; however after observing the individual people in the video, I now have a hard time saying any or all shouldn’t be allowed.  

            The Betty and George Columbus story had a big effect on me. While I couldn’t see myself wanting to pass away while I was completely healthy, after watching the clip you could tell that it was something they truly wanted.  It was sad how they had to wait so long and it was never possible for them to die in each others arms. 

             I think situationally these three process are acceptable therefore I suppose if I had to state my opinion on the legality, I’d say I was for it. I feel that is it really a personal decision so it is hard to judge unless you’re that person. 

Blog 5

The movie that we watched in class was truly interesting. While it was sad, I don’t think I would have ever been able to grasp the concept of assisted suicide without seeing it. I have a much greater understanding of the process that takes place. It is fascinating that there are only a few countries that allow assisted suicide to take place.

            I had a hard time putting myself in a position of wanting to end my life. Prior to this movie, I thought that there would be no way I would want to purposely end my life. I have always thought that suicide is one of most selfish things a human can do. It affects many people. While any death affects people in negative ways, it is hard to know that people can be so unhappy that they have to end their lives. Friends and family can spend their entire lives blaming themselves for that person’s death. While I always knew assisted suicide was different, I still saw it as something that can hurt other people.

             The video we watched in class really changed my mind. I liked how the man compared it too a premature baby that was born and how without the help of technology, that baby would pass away so we are choosing that the child lives instead of putting in it God’s hands. We are choosing the fate of the child. The man explains it is the same with death. Everyone should be able to choose to end their lives sooner when they have a terminal illness. What really stuck with me was when he said that either he dies while he is happy and not in pain or he suffers than passes away; either way he dies.

            What I had a hard time with was the fact that he had to hurry up and go through with the processes because he had to be able to swallow it himself. Once he was unable to swallow, he would loose the opportunity to do it. While this makes sense because if someone else did it would be murder, I think it is hard to end your life early because you don’t know when you will loose your ability to go through the processes yourself.  In the end as much as I think it would be a hard decision the film convinced me that it is a decision people should get to make.  

Blog # 4

             What I found most interesting after class this week was all the immoral research that has occurred. I found it fascinating how so many terrible things had happened in the past that I had never even heard of before. Not only did I find it interesting I also couldn’t believe how immoral these experiments were. It seemed to me like they were horror movies that were just made up to scare people.

The Nazi experiments seemed the most horrible to me. The people had no rights. I don’t know how someone could treat another human being in that way. They had to know at some level that what they were doing was morally wrong. Were moral rights and treatments of people different back then? Were they taught that if people were a different race or religion they didn’t have the same feelings?

Another experiment that was interesting to me was the Tuskegee syphilis. This study was morally and ethically wrong. People were just being used. They had no idea what they were being infected with. They just thought that they were being treated for “bad Blood.” They were also told if they participated they would be given free medical care but they didn't have any idea what the trade off was.

After learning about these cases I did wonder how different our knowledge of medicine would have been without them. I don’t think if you had told people the truth they would have ever volunteered to be part of the Tuskegee syphilis so would we know what we do know if that event hadn’t happened. However, let me be perfectly clear that even though the research did benefit our society, it was morally and ethically wrong and should never have been done.

Blog # 3

The conclusion in the Cosmetic Surgery section of the class notes states:

• Due to questionable and subjective benefit, is solidly a peripheral practice.

• Advertising crosses the line into unethical behavior.

• Therefore, cosmetic surgery, as it is practiced now, goes against and even threatens to erode the internal morality of medicine.

I would agree with the first statement, which states that cosmetic surgery is a peripheral practice. A peripheral practice implies that within the type of practice, all of the surgeries as a whole are not either medical or non-medical. While some procedures would definitely be defined as medically necessary, others would fall under elective surgery that has no medical need. I think cosmetic surgery falls clearly within this definition.

However, I disagree with the second statement. I don't think that advertising for cosmetic surgery by definition crosses a line into unethical behavior. It okay for cosmetic surgeons to advertise in an attempt to explain the reasoning and background, to explain what surgeries they perform, and to get their name out there.  Many practices advertise. I have seen billboard for hospitals on the highway all the time. But there can be unethical advertising in any medical profession. An emergency room could advertise that at the first sign of feeling poorly you should rush to the ER. That would be unethical. The same hold true for cosmetic surgery. Advertising to promote cosmetic surgery in general is fine but what we watched in class I thought was ethically wrong. 

So, if there is a way to advertise that is not crossing a line, you can no longer say that as a whole, cosmetic surgery goes against or threatens to erode the internal morality of medicine. The way some cosmetic surgeons advertise or run their practice would definitely erode the morality of medicine while others do not do so. So over all I don’t agree with the third bullet point. 

Difference Vs. Disability

I found the discussion about whether having deaf children receive implants when they are born is the right decision or not. In the beginning of class, my first instinct was to question why a parents wouldn't want their children to have the ability to hear if they were given that opportunity. As class continued, I realized that most of the time even if children or young adults have the choice, they will not choose to have this procedure done. This forces us to think about who is to judge what the norm is for people. I liked how the video we watched in class said that what if I were to walk into a room of all deaf people, I would be the one out of place because I would not be able to follow the conversation. This calls up the question difference and disability. If it's a true disability and there is a fix for it, that would be an easier decision. But if it's just a difference, then what? Sometimes we can wait for the children to grow up to make decisions about medical procedures, but sometimes it is necessary to make them earlier. It is a tough call to decide if someone's differences qualify as disability or not.
This discussion made me think about the larger concept of one person making a decision for another person and how that would be more difficult than making a decision for yourself. If I had to choose whether to have a medical procedure for myself, I would do all the research, ask a lot of questions, talk to people who have chosen the procedure and to people who have chosen not to have it. I would make the best decision I could, and then I would live with the consequences. But to have the responsibility to make that kind of decision for another person would be hard. I would do all the same things in making the decision, but because it wouldn't be ME who has to live with the consequences but rather someone else, it would be much harder. That person would have different opinions and life experiences that might make a decision that I would be happy with something that he or she would not be happy with.
Parents have to make a lot of decisions for their children: whether to immunize; what schools to attend; whether to raise them in a small town or a big city, etc. Those decisions alone would be difficult. But to have to choose about having a medical procedure that will alter the course of their kid's life would be really hard. I suppose the best way to do it is to apply the same method you would use for making your own decision...get as much information from as many sources as possible, especially from people who are in the specific situation as the child, and then decide.