First ‘embryo bank’ raises designer-baby fears

SuzannePjamSuzannePjam Posts: 411
edited January 2007 in A Moving Train
To read the complete article just click on the link.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16492832/

First ‘embryo bank’ raises designer-baby fears
Firm lets clients pick among fertilized eggs for made-to-order embryos

By Rob Stein
Washington Post staff writer

A Texas company has started producing batches of ready-made embryos that single women and infertile couples can order after reviewing detailed information about the race, education, appearance, personality and other characteristics of the egg and sperm donors.
The Abraham Center of Life LLC of San Antonio, the first commercial dealer making embryos in advance for unspecified recipients, was created to help make it easier and more affordable for clients to have babies that match their preferences, according to its founder.
"We're just trying to help people have babies," said Jennalee Ryan, who arranged for an egg donor to start medical treatments to produce a second batch of embryos this week. "For me, that's what this is all about: helping make babies."
But the embryo brokerage, which calls itself "the world's first human embryo bank," raises alarm among some fertility experts and bioethicists, who say the service marks another disturbing step toward commercialization of human reproduction and "designer babies."
"We're increasingly treating children like commodities," said Mark A. Rothstein, a bioethicist at the University of Louisville in Kentucky. "It's like you're ordering a computer from Dell: You give them the specs, and they put it in the mail. I don't think we should consider mail-order computers and other products the same way we consider children."
Off-the-shelf commodity
Prospective parents have long been able to select egg or sperm donors based on ethnicity, education and other traits. Couples can also "adopt" embryos left over at fertility clinics, or have embryos created for them if they need both eggs and sperm. But the new service marks the first time anyone has started turning out embryos as off-the-shelf products.
Before contracting for the embryos, clients can evaluate the egg and sperm donors, and can even see pictures of them as babies, children and sometimes adults. A fertility specialist will then transfer the embryos into a client's womb or into a surrogate, which Ryan can also arrange.
"We're unique," Ryan said. "We're the only one in the world doing this right now."
Some fertility doctors and ethicists are undisturbed by the Abraham Center because the service does not differ markedly from what already happens routinely at fertility clinics.
"I know some people say: 'This is shocking. Embryos made to order,' " said John A. Robertson of the University of Texas at Austin, who advises fertility specialists on ethical issues. "But if you step back a little bit, you realize that people are already choosing sperm and egg donors in separate transactions. Combining them doesn't pose any new major ethical problems."
But others condemned the process as the unsettling culmination of recent objectionable developments, including the payment of egg and sperm donors and the growing tendency to try to select traits such as sex, intelligence and appearance.
"People have long warned we were moving toward a 'Brave New World,' " said Robert P. George of Princeton University, who serves on the President's Council on Bioethics. "This is just more evidence that we haven't been able to restrain this move towards treating human life like a commodity. This buying and selling of eggs and sperm and now embryos based on IQ points and PhDs and other traits really moves us in the direction of eugenics."
"We find this very troubling," agreed Steven Ory, president of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. "This is essentially making embryos a commodity and using technology to breed them, if you will, for certain traits."
Ryan dismissed the complaints.
This is not 'the new Hitler'
"People can say, 'Oh, this is the new Hitler.' That's not the case," she said. "I don't take orders. I say 'This is what I have' and send them the background. If they don't think it's right for them, they don't have to take them."
So far the embryos Ryan has created have been from white donors, but she said that was because most of the couples that have contacted her are white. Among the more than 150 couples on her waiting list are African Americans, and she plans to try to create embryos for them, as well as possibly other races and mixes of races.
Ryan is, however, using only egg donors who are in their 20s and have at least some college education and only sperm donors who have advanced education, such as a PhD or law degree. All must undergo a standard round of health tests required for all egg and sperm donors, as well as screening to make sure they have no criminal record or family history of mental illness, Ryan said. They answer detailed questionnaires that ask about their childhood temperaments, favorite books, adult hobbies and family histories.
"If I do discriminate, it's that I only want healthy, intelligent people," Ryan said. "People will say, 'You're trying to create the perfect human race.' But we've always done gene selection just by who women choose as their husbands and men choose as their wives. This is no different."
"Where there is sacrifice there is someone collecting the sacrificial offerings."-- Ayn Rand

"Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • decides2dreamdecides2dream Posts: 14,977
    hmmmmmmmmm.....very interesting. to a certain extent, i do see what they're saying...already one has choice in egg and sperm donors...and here you are taking an already created embryo and utilizing it. it is a scary thought though when you task it to the next level and think, what next?
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • chopitdownchopitdown Posts: 2,222
    hmmmmmmmmm.....very interesting. to a certain extent, i do see what they're saying...already one has choice in egg and sperm donors...and here you are taking an already created embryo and utilizing it. it is a scary thought though when you task it to the next level and think, what next?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • I like the articles that suzannepjam always posts. Right on.
    All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
    -Enoch Powell
  • I like the articles that suzannepjam always posts. Right on.
    Awwww.... thanks! :)
    "Where there is sacrifice there is someone collecting the sacrificial offerings."-- Ayn Rand

    "Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
    But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    Wow! I can have the perfect kid and nobody bats an eye. I want to have the one I am carrying pulled from me because I know it is not going to be a normal child and all hell breaks loose. Makes perfect sense to me. :rolleyes:
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    Articles like this will make children with disabilities (who happen to make the real difference in the world) obsolete. Create a perfect world and all will be perfect? I seriously doubt it. Ethically speaking, articles like this are disgusting.
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,447
    I believe this is steping over the line.

    Of course, I think we have already steped over that line.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • I agree that this just doesn't seem right. When these children become adults they may want to know more about their biological parents, if their custodial parents have been honest with them, then what?? What rights will they have in finding out where their genes came from and what does that do to the rights of the donors who have probably been guaranteed confidentiality. Who's rights are more important? It might not be not seem like that big of a deal to some but I have a friend who has no idea who her father is and it troubles her daily.
    you must be the change you want to see in the world ~ Mahatma Gandhi
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    FreeMind wrote:
    What rights will they have in finding out where their genes came from and what does that do to the rights of the donors who have probably been guaranteed confidentiality. .

    In the UK and various other countries, children born through egg or sperm donation have the right to trace their biological parents once they reach a certain aga. So, though the donors remain anonymous, if a child who know he/she has been conceived that way, wishes to find out who the 'parents' are, he/she can. Sperm and egg donation has drastically reduced in those countries! I don't think the US is like that yet, but I'm sure it will come...
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    The embryo you get has a defect, can you return it?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    Ahnimus wrote:
    The embryo you get has a defect, can you return it?
    No, but I'm guessing you can sue for big bucks!!!
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    Ahnimus wrote:
    The embryo you get has a defect, can you return it?

    One free abortion or your money back.

    It would sure be costly to flush 10,000$ or however much it is to have a designer kid down the toilette.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • angelicaangelica Posts: 6,038
    Jeanwah wrote:
    Articles like this will make children with disabilities (who happen to make the real difference in the world) obsolete. Create a perfect world and all will be perfect? I seriously doubt it. Ethically speaking, articles like this are disgusting.
    The scary thing is our idea of "perfect" and how skewed it is by a majority of people who create that standard.

    When I started waking up out of the fog of my drastically "imperfect" mentally ill life, and becoming healthy, I was shocked and horrified to see the truth of the so-called healthy or "normal" people all around. I spent years wishing I were "normal" like everyone else. I eventually came to see that "normal" did not exist. After hating the "imperfection" of mental illness, and my supposed genetic "flaws", I eventually learned that the whole concept was a complete illusion. What we look upon as flaws can sometimes be gifts in our lives--gifts that we do not understand, but yet very much need.

    Unfortunately, as we continue to prioritize scientific "advancement" while basically overlooking inner subjective advancement, we become further and further out of touch with what it is we are actually missing in life.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    angelica wrote:
    ..After hating the "imperfection" of mental illness, and my supposed genetic "flaws", I eventually learned that the whole concept was a complete illusion. What we look upon as flaws can sometimes be gifts in our lives--gifts that we do not understand, but yet very much need.
    So true! My daughter has Down syndrome, and I can't imagine a better gift given to me and the world. She has so much to offer, but she's not a perfectly normal person, so someone like her wouldn't have been picked as an embryo. Instead she would have been thrown away, which is very disturbing.
    Unfortunately, as we continue to prioritize scientific "advancement" while basically overlooking inner subjective advancement, we become further and further out of touch with what it is we are actually missing in life.
    So true!
  • angelicaangelica Posts: 6,038
    Jeanwah wrote:
    So true! My daughter has Down syndrome, and I can't imagine a better gift given to me and the world. She has so much to offer, but she's not a perfectly normal person, so someone like her wouldn't have been picked as an embryo. Instead she would have been thrown away, which is very disturbing.
    I think I understand what kind of gift you are talking, here! The idea of throwing away what does not fit some skewed sense of "normal" is quite nauseating to me as well.

    I remember years back, in the midst of mental illness, being mortified that I passed on my "genetic flaws" to my two children, and horrified what I had "done to them". And with time, growth and in developing insight, I've come to let go of the actual flaw, being such mindsets. My children are both sensitive, special human beings.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    Playing devil's advocate here... so please.. no hate posts from people who are out of the 'norm' or have children/family out of the norm.... I'm already going to have to try and write this without offending anyone....

    We have gone this far in medicine.. to a point where we can almost guarantee a 'healthy' child (ie with none of the 'blips'/diseases that would currently be considered as 'defects'). Whilst I believe everyone has his/her place on this earth, whether considered within the norm of society or not, and every child is a gift, as a prospective parent - if you were offered the choice - would you not rather have a child whom you are almost 100% sure will not suffer from a debilitating disease or a genetic defect that could cause suffering (especially if it runs in the family)? Note that here I am not talking about discarding imperfect embryos, just removing the imperfection. And please, Jeanwah and those with similar experiences, please do not think that I am belittling your children or demeaning their value and place in society - it's just a question.

    As an example: my brother-in-law suffers from a debilitating bone disease (sorry, don't know medical term). A genetic flaw passed on by the female to a male that can skip generations before manifesting itself (but she didn't know that). The disease started to manifest itself in by brother-in-law's teens. My mother-in-law spent years watching him suffer, not being able to walk or bend. Or stay bent and not be able to straighten up.. Getting all crooked. Painkillers didn't work anymore.. All this time he was trying to lead a normal life (which he did.... to a point). Then he suffered through numerous operations, the latest being to completely pin his spine with a metal rod, hips, etc. It was only during this time that she found out it was a genetic condition and, since it can skip several generations, no one remembered it happening in the family until research was done. This flawed gene has now been identified and now, with gene therapy, she could have had a 'normal' child. Would she have done it? Yes, she said. One would say that the suffering shaped my brother in law to what he is now. He says, though he is as he is, he definitely wouldn't have minded being 'healthy' (and be healthy now too - he is still in constant pain). Sorry long rambling for just a little example.

    Medicine has always strived to combat disease, repair limbs, even sew on new limbs, etc. The question is: " have we gone too far?". If yes, where should we have stopped? Should we revert back to where we were say... 50 years ago? I certainly believe the thought 'designer babies' (ie: I want brown eyes, blond hair, tall, artistic, etc....) is scary but do we stop this kind of research because some may misuse it (and certainly will) to the detriment of those who would use it wisely?
  • angelicaangelica Posts: 6,038
    redrock wrote:
    Playing devil's advocate here... so please.. no hate posts from people who are out of the 'norm' or have children/family out of the norm.... I'm already going to have to try and write this without offending anyone....

    We have gone this far in medicine.. to a point where we can almost guarantee a 'healthy' child (ie with none of the 'blips'/diseases that would currently be considered as 'defects'). Whilst I believe everyone has his/her place on this earth, whether considered within the norm of society or not, and every child is a gift, as a prospective parent - if you were offered the choice - would you not rather have a child whom you are almost 100% sure will not suffer from a debilitating disease or a genetic defect that could cause suffering (especially if it runs in the family)? And please, Jeanwah and those with similar experiences, please do not think that I am belittling your children or demeaning their value and place in society - it's just a question.

    As an example: my brother-in-law suffers from a debilitating bone disease (sorry, don't know medical term). A genetic flaw passed on by the female to a male that can skip generations before manifesting itself (but she didn't know that). The disease started to manifest itself in by brother-in-law's teens. My mother-in-law spent years watching him suffer, not being able to walk or bend. Or stay bent and not be able to straighten up.. Getting all crooked. Painkillers didn't work anymore.. All this time he was trying to lead a normal life (which he did.... to a point). Then he suffered through numerous operations, the latest being to completely pin his spine with a metal rod, hips, etc. It was only during this time that she found out it was a genetic condition and, since it can skip several generations, no one remembered it happening in the family until research was done. This flawed gene has now been identified and now, with gene therapy, she could have had a 'normal' child. Would she have done it? Yes, she said. One would say that the suffering shaped my brother in law to what he is now. He says, though he is as he is, he definitely wouldn't have minded being 'healthy' (and be healthy now too - he is still in constant pain). Sorry long rambling for just a little example.

    Medicine has always strived to combat disease, repair limbs, even sew on new limbs, etc. The question is: " have we gone too far?". If yes, where should we have stopped? Should we revert back to where we were say... 50 years ago? I certainly believe the thought 'designer babies' (ie: I want brown eyes, blond hair, tall, artistic, etc....) is scary but do we stop this kind of research because some may misuse it (and certainly will) to the detriment of those who would use it wisely?
    I understand there are valid reasons to look to prevent potential problems in our future. I'm all for evolution and our natural drive forward. My concern lies in when we don't also place priority on our inner journey forward on a subjective level. I see we need to balance our objective understandings with subjective inner health, wherein we can expand our ethical sense alongside our technological ability. I would be very pleased if we could eradicate mental illness, or other issues. However, for myself, by balancing out my inner world to a degree, I've come to learn that mental illness was more of an alarm bell that taught me to resolve my life problems, rather than being the problem in of itself. Therefore, I think until we prioritize the path to our balance as humans being, we might eradicate this or that problem, while creating even larger ones in their place.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    I see what you're saying Redrock, but the resolution here would be advancing technology in medicine and curing diseases, rather than advancing technology into embryonic outcome. Know what I'm saying? How about focusing on and saving those who live in constant pain, such as your bro-in-law, and not spend so much time and money into the "what ifs" of designer babies. If we could come up w/ medicinal outcomes for those living now, maybe then we can move that into the unborn. What we're doing instead is creating a eugenic society.

    There are constantly new technologic prenatal tests coming out for pregnant women. Most of these tests are not 100% accurate, and many have to do with the possiblilties of having a baby with Down syndrome. But what about those living with this disability? Yes, treatment is 300 times better than what they used to be, but I'd personally like to see more money going into disability awareness, inclusion, and health and developmental treatments. RATHER than, the "possibility" of having a baby w/ it in the first place! Doctors are consistently belittling the mere idea of bringing to term a baby they know will have complications. This says a lot about our acceptance of those that are imperfect, but also ponders the question of treatments and why we aren't concentrating in that area.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    I'm absolutely with you there.... no question! Personally, I believe if an embryo was not meant to develop, nature will abort (is it up to 50% of pregnancies spontaneously abort due to 'abnormalities'?) even before a lady may know she is pregnant. And even after, tests during pregnancy are far from accurate. That's why when I was pregnant at 36 (thus a high risk for Downs), I refused the amniocentesis, first of all because it's invasive but also because I knew that I wouldn't abort if it was positive. Even if a child is born with Downs, the spectrum of this disability is so wide that you do not get rid of a foetus on those grounds.

    You are right in saying that money and research should be in helping and treating those with disabilities/diseases/defects, whatever those may be. There is a lot more we can do for total integration in our society.

    EDIT: Can I also say what bothers me with these designer baby things is that I do not believe in IVF. That just makes to have a child, a right, not a privilege or blessing. I can already hear the uproar from that ladies and gents who really want a biological child and for some reason can't. They will say that it is an 'illness' and should be treated as such. After all, we can put in a new ticker, cut away something nasty, so why not a child..... But somehow, I don't feel it's right....
  • chopitdown wrote:








    WORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    this is so fucking ridiculous. Humans are the most vain, arrogant and destructive creatures ever to walk this planet.
    ~*~Me and Hippiemom dranketh the red wine in Cleveland 2003~*~

    First PJ Show: March 20, 1994 | Ann Arbor | Crisler Arena
Sign In or Register to comment.