Embryo selection Genetics and human dignity

Ángela Aparisi Miralles.
Director of high school of Human Rights, University of Navarra.
Diario de Noticias (Pamplona), March 19, 2002.

A few days ago, the media reported that, in the USA, it had been possible to select an embryo whose genome did not contain the gene that causes a certain subject Alzheimer's disease. This selection had been carried out by means of preimplantation diagnosis - performed in an in vitro fertilization process - and had made it possible to choose, from among fifteen, an embryo that had not inherited the disease.

Many congratulated themselves on what they called a "new achievement" of science Genetics. However, some scientists, more knowledgeable about topic, responded that embryo selection is nothing new. Moreover, they publicly acknowledged that it is performed in many in vitro fertilization clinics in Spain.

The fact is that "selection Genetics" was already recommended in the well-known report Warnock, elaborated in 1982 on the initiative of the English Government, which has deeply inspired English and Spanish legislation on artificial insemination techniques. On the other hand, some years ago, scientists working on project Human Genome warned about the possibility of a progressive exacerbation of the eugenic mentality. Watson, award Nobel Prize winner and one of the most prestigious figures of modern Genetics , proposed that at least 3% of the funds allocated to finance the project Human Genome should be allocated, among other things, to the study and prevention of the danger of this "new eugenics".

Preimplantation diagnosis, a prelude to selection?

There is currently a strong controversy in some countries about topic. discussion In fact, on May 31, 2001, a heated debate took place in the German Parliament between Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and the President of the country, Johannes Rau, on the possibility, among others, of legalizing preimplantation diagnosis. In response to the Chancellor's favorable stance, Johannes Rau sharply criticized the legalization of embryo selection, stating that "eugenics, euthanasia and selection are concepts that are linked to Germany's bad report ". He added: "Who can guarantee that preimplantation diagnostics will not open the door to selection?

When speaking of eugenics, it is important to distinguish clearly between two assumptions, which are not always well differentiated: on the one hand, ethically laudable attempts to eradicate diseases. The fight against human diseases cannot be considered, in the proper sense, a modality of eugenics. On the contrary, eugenic ideology, properly speaking, is based on specific anthropological assumptions: the intrinsic value of a human being, in this case the embryo, is made to depend, fundamentally, on its genotypic characteristics. In any case, the rejection of the pathology or the "genetic defect" is extended to the carrier of the same. Based on these assumptions, it is clear that the "new eugenics" implies a radical anthropological reductionism, and at the same time carries a great discriminatory and harmful burden on human dignity. The value of the human embryo is reduced to the quality of its genome, considered, on the other hand, no more valuable than that of any other living being.

As the prestigious geneticist Jacques Testard has pointed out, the reality is that preimplantation diagnosis leads to the "painless" exclusion of potential children thanks to the screening of conceived children, dozens of times more numerous than that of fetuses subjected to prenatal diagnosis. This has led to avoiding the birth of children with genetic characteristics that do not officially justify abortion. It has also begun to be applied, in addition to monogenic diseases, to polygenic conditions, i.e. to simple risk factors. For this scientist, it is important to emphasize that there is currently no subject brake on preimplantation diagnostics. The "quality controls Genetics" of embryos are a reality and have become a potentially unlimited internship . In this regard, Michael Kirby, member of the UNESCO International Bioethics committee asks: Where does this process of elimination of human life begin and where does it end? Can this attempt to eradicate even the slightest genetic defect by eliminating the human being himself be admitted?

But the problem will worsen in the not too distant future. Some researchers have stated that within a few years it will be possible to create DNA analysis techniques that will make it possible to examine the entire chromosomal endowment of an embryo and thus detect any unimaginable hereditary defect or fragility, and even any genetic constitutive data subject (eye color, hair, base Genetics of the stature, etc.). Therefore, the information Genetics obtainable from the moment of the fusion of the ovum with the spermatozoon, which gives rise to a new human being, will be of an unsuspected caliber. In the U.S., Capron has pointed out that this subject of tests will be systematically carried out on the conceived. For this author, even the continuation of health insurance could be made dependent on the decision to abort, since companies will not want to pay position for the costs generated by an offspring that is sick or likely to become sick. Although this internship is not yet widespread, for this author it is to be expected that in societies as competitive and economistic as today's, such a requirement will become routine.

Not everything that can be done should be done

Against this, it should be pointed out that the value of a human being cannot be made to depend on the quality or characteristics of his or her genome, but on the mere fact of belonging to the human species. In fact, every possessor of a human genome, even if considered "defective," must have his or her radical dignity recognized. In this sense, the preamble of the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, of the committee of Europe, establishes "the need to respect the human being, not only as an individual but also as a member of the human species", recognizing the importance of guaranteeing his dignity. And along the same lines, article 2, section a) of the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights, states that "each individual is entitled to respect for his dignity and rights, whatever his genetic characteristics". Point b) states that "this dignity requires that individuals should not be reduced to their genetic characteristics and that their uniqueness and diversity should be respected".

At final, it can be maintained that, to a large extent, the destiny of humanity will be strongly determined by the answer to the question of whether the human embryo is a thing, a human being or an intermediate entity yet to be defined. What we are debating is, in short, the very notion of human being and the meaning of its dignity. Respect for this dignity means that, in the scientific field, not everything that can be done should be done.