The topic of choice is bioethical issues in genetic analysis and manipulations. This topic was chosen because it is an interesting argument that may lead to beneficial debates. The genetic structures and processes involved in this subject are not exactly a part of it. Rather, they are the topic itself. The genetic manipulations caused a lot of discussion across the health care and scientific community. Many researchers dwell on the issue of how acceptable the interventions in human genetic information are. For example, an article by Belsky and Ijzendoorn concludes that “We are currently far from a point where we can claim that we should be providing interventions to some and not others due to their genetic makeup” (4). Thus, the problem does not only involve the topic of whether or not genetic interventions are acceptable. In fact, the bioethical perspective on this debate creates another question – does the genetic makeup influence the possibility of intervention? If so, then who should undergo genetic manipulations?
On the other hand, Mitalipov and Wolf state that “Ethical issues concerning mtDNA transfer have also been extensively examined by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics in the UK and summarized in a report concluding that… “we believe that if these novel techniques are adequately proven to be acceptably safe and effective as treatments, it would be ethical for families to use them” (7). Thus, although the research focuses on only one practice – there is a robust implementation that the moral problem is resolved when the practice is hazard-proof and can be regulated. Therefore, the argumentation is presented for both supporters and opposers. However solid the argumentation may be, it is highly unlikely that either side of this debate will gain the upper hand over the discussion anytime soon.
References
Mitalipov, S., Wolf, & D. P. (2014). Clinical and ethical implications of mitochondrial gene transfer. Trends Endocrinol Metab., 25(1), 5-7.
Belsky, J., & Ijzendoorn, M. H. V. (2015). What works for whom? Genetic moderation of intervention efficacy. Development and Psychopathology, 27(1), 1-6.