Diagnóstico genético preimplantatorio y el "bebé medicamento"criterios éticos encontrados en la lliteratura biomédica y bioética

  1. Arango Restrepo, Pablo
  2. Sánchez Abad, Pedro José
  3. Pastor García, Luis Miguel
Journal:
Cuadernos de bioética

ISSN: 1132-1989,  2386-3773

Year of publication: 2012

Volume: 23

Issue: 78

Pages: 301-320

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Cuadernos de bioética

Abstract

A bibliographic review on «saviour sibling» was performed in order to find out the ethical criteria put forward by the authors on this issue. 23 biomedical and 10 bioethical journals were reviewed and authors for and against the procedure were found. In the Biomedical journals, the main arguments for this issue are that nobody should be hurt and that there is an ethical imperative that is to save a life and that this is preferable to abortion. Those against, believe that an inadequate discrimination against women is being exerted on one hand by subjecting them to a complex, inefficient and dangerous procedure, and on the other, against embryos when many healthy ones are rejected because they are not compatible, or because of the dangers to the embryo, and also the psychological problems for the sick child as well as the donor. In the bioethical journals, we found a higher proportion of papers that are in its favor than in biomedical journals. The arguments are similar to those of the bioethical ones, but there are some particular arguments such as that the autonomy of parents must be respected; that it is a success of the common sense; that it is not an invasive process as it is considered; that it only involves blood donation not a solid organ; that the child that donates will feel accompanied by the saved one and he/she will feel the satisfaction of since having helped someone to live because without this procedure, the baby child would probably not have been born. The arguments against are the discrimination women undergo when they are subjected to this procedure with potential risks for her, the embryos and children. In conclusion: a) the morality of «saviour sibling» medicine not has been debated in the bioethics and biomedical community before its implementation b) in both communities the majority of authors consider it to be ethically licit; c) paradoxically there is a greater relative percentage of authors who are critical of it within the biomedical field than in bioethics; d) from a personalist bioethics perspective a human embryo is endowed with the dignity of a person and as such must be respected, this technique being an positive eugenics practice, in which, after previous selection health embryos are deprived of their right to exist.

Bibliographic References

  • Baynes, JW. y Dominiczak, MH. Bioquímica médica. 3ª. edición. 2011. Elsevier, España, p. 514.
  • ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law includes F. Shenfield, G. Pennings, J. Cohen, P. Devroey and B.Tarlatzis. Taskforce 9: the application of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for human leukocyte antigen typing of embryos. Hum Reprod, 2005, vol. 20 n. 4: 845-847.
  • Verlinsky Y., Rechitsky, S. y cols. Preimplantation diagnosis for Fanconi anemia combined with HLA matching. JAMA, 2001 n. 285: 3130-33.
  • Kuliev, A., Rechitsky, S. y cols. Preimplantation genetics: improving access to stem cell therapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005; 1054: 223-7.
  • Boyle, K., Vlahos, N. y Jarow, J. Assisted Reproductive Technology in the New Millennium: Part II. Urology, 2004, 63: 217-224.
  • Boyle, R.J. y Savulescu, J. Ethics of using preimplantation genetic diagnosis to select a stem cell donor for an existing person. BMJ, 2001, vol. 323: 1240-43.
  • Sermon, K., Van Sterteghem, A. y cols. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Review. Lancet, 2004, vol. 363: 1633-41.
  • Grace, J, El Toukhy, T. y cols. Preimplantation genetic testing. BJOG, 2004. vol. 111, 1165-1173.
  • Kuliev, A. y Verlinsky, Y. Preimplantation HLA typing and stem cell transplantation: report of International Meeting, Cyprus, 27 – 28 March, 2004. Reprod Biomed Online, 2004, vol. 9 n. 2: 205-209.
  • Sutton, A. Saviour siblings. Medicina y Ética, 2006, vol. 17 n. 4: 233-243.
  • Baetens, P., Van de Velde, H. y cols. HLAmatched embryos selected for sibling requiring haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a psychological perspective. Reprod Biomed Online, 2005, vol. 10, n. 2.
  • Fiorentino, F., Biricik, A., y cols. Development and clinical application of a strategy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single gene disorders combined with HLA matching. Mol Hum Reprod, 2004, vol. 10 n. 6: 445-460.
  • Van de Velde H., Georgiou, I. y cols. Novel universal approach for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of β-thalassaemia in combination with HLA matching of embryos. Hum Reprod, 2004, vol. 19:700-708 citado en: Devol. der, K. Preimplantation HLA typing: having children to save our love ones. J Med Ethics, 2005, 31: 582-586.
  • Fost, N.C. Conception for donation. JAMA, 2004, vol. 291: 2125-2126.
  • Arango, P. y Pastor, LM. Diagnóstico genético preimplantatorio (DGP). Juicios éticos emitidos en revistas biomédicas y bioéticas: un análisis crítico de los mismos desde la bioética personalista. Universidad de Murcia (España), Tesis doctoral, noviembre 2009.
  • Damewood, M.D. Ethical Implication of a New Application of Preimplantation Diagnosis. JAMA, 2001, vol. 285 n. 24: 3143-3144.
  • Pennings, G., Schots, R, y cols. Ethical considerations on preimplantation genetic diagnosis for HLA typing to match a future child as a donor of haematopoietic stem cells to a sibling. Hum Reprod, 2002, vol. 17 n. 3: 534-538.
  • Robertson, J.A. Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: the ethical debate. Ethical issues in new uses of preimplantation diagnosis. Hum Reprod, 2003, vol. 18 n. 3: 465-471.
  • Edwards, R. Ethics of PGD: thoughts on the consequences of tiping HLA in embryos. Reprod Biomed Online, 2004, vol. 9 n. 2: 222-224.
  • Robertson, J.A. Embryo screening for tissue matching. Fertil Steril, 2004, vol. 82 n. 2: 2090-2091.
  • Verlinsky, Y. Designing babies: what the future holds. Reprod Biomed Online, 2005, vol. 10 supp 1: 24-26.
  • De Wert, G. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: the ethics of intermediate cases. Hum Reprod (Advance Access published), 2005, August 25, p. 1-6.
  • Verlinsky, Y., Rechitsky, S., y cols. Preimplantation HLA testing. JAMA, 2004, vol. 291: 2079-2085.
  • Shenfield, F. Le diagnostic préimplantatoire en vue de choisir un enfant sauveur de fratrie. Gynecol Obstet Fertil, 2005, vol. 33: 833-835.
  • ESHRE. The ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law includes Taskforce 9: the application of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for human leukocyte antigen typing of embryos. Shenfield, F., G.Pennings, y cols. Hum Reprod, 2005, vol. 20 n. 4: 845-847.
  • Pennings, G., Schots, R. y Liebaers, I. Ethical considerations on preimplantation genetic diagnosis for HLA typing to match a future child as a donor of haematopoietic stem cells to a sibling. Hum Reprod, 2002, vol. 17 n. 3: 534-538.
  • Dahl. E. Commentary. Babies design: a response to Martin Johnson´s moral case study on tissue typing. Reprod Biomed OnLine. vol. 9, n. 6: 597-598.
  • Robertson, J.A. Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: the ethical debate. Ethical issues in new uses of preimplantation diagnosis. Hum Reprod, 2003, vol. 18 n. 3: 465-471.
  • ESHRE Ethics Task Force. Taskforce 5: preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Shenfield, F., Pennings, G., y cols. Hum Reprod, 2003, vol. 18 n. 3: 649-651.
  • Turner, S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for donor babies carries some harm. (Letter). BMJ, 2002, Vol 324: 976-977.
  • Vastag, B. Merits of Embryo Screening Debated. JAMA, 2004, Vol 291:927-929.
  • Simon, A. y Schenker, J. Ethical Consideretion of intentioned preimplantation genetic diagnosis to enable future tissue transplantation. Reprod Biomed Online, 2005, Vol 10, n.3, 320-324.
  • Klipstein, S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: technological promise and ethical perils. Fertil Steril, 2005, Vol 83, n. 5 1347-1353.
  • Fost, NC. Conception for donation. JAMA, 2004; 291: 2125-2126. 73 Bui, The-Hung y Harper, JC. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2002, Vol 45 n. 3: 640-648.
  • Bui, The-Hung y Harper, JC. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2002, Vol 45 n. 3: 640-648.
  • Robertson, JA. Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: medical and non-medical uses. J Med Ethics, 2003, vol. 29: 213-216.
  • Sheldon, S y Wilkinson, S. Should selecting saviour sibling be banned? J Med Ethics, 2004, vol. 30: 533-537.
  • Spriggs, M. Is conceiving a child to benefit another against the interests of the new child? J Med Ethics, 2005, vol. 31: 341-342.
  • Savulescu, J. Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children. Bioethics, 2001, vol. 15: 413-426.
  • Robertson, J.A. Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: medical and non-medical uses. J Med Ethics, 2003, vol. 29: 213-216.
  • Robertson, J.A, Kohn J.P, y cols. Conception to obtain hematopoietic stem cell. Hastings Cent Rep, 2002, vol. 32: 34-40.
  • DeVolder, K. Preimplantation HLA typing: having children to save our love ones. J Med Ethics, 2005, vol. 31: 582-586.
  • Ashcroft, R. Bach to the future: response to: Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: medical and non-medical uses. J Med Ethics, 2003, vol. 29: 217-19.
  • Baetens, P., Van de Velde, H., y cols. HLAmatched embryos selected for sibling requiring haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a psycological perspective. Reprod Biomed Online, 2005, vol. 10 n. 2: 154-163.
  • Damewood, M.D. Ethical Implication of a New Application of Preimplantation Diagnosis. JAMA, 2001, vol. 285 n. 24: 3143-3144.
  • ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law includes. Taskforce 9: the application of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for human leukocyte antigen typing of embryos. Shenfield, F., Pennings, G. y cols. Hum Reprod, 2005, vol. 20, n.4, 845-847.
  • Springgs, J. y Savulescu, J. “Saviour siblings”. J Med Ethics, 2000, vol. 28: 289.
  • Devolder, K. Preimplantation HLA typing: having children to save our love ones. J Med Ethics, 2005, vol. 31: 582-586.
  • Ashcroft, R. Bach to the future: response to: Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: medical and non-medical uses. J Med Ethics, 2003, vol. 29: 217-19.
  • De Melo-Martín, I. On Our Obligation to Select the Best Children: a Reply to Savulescu. Bioéthics, 2004, 18: 72-83.
  • Pastor LM. Bioética de la manipulación embrionaria. Cuad Bioet. 31, 3 (1997), 1074-1103.
  • Andorno, R. Bioética y Dignidad de la Persona. Tecnos, Madrid, 1998, p. 79.
  • Graumann, S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis the bridge between human genetics and reproductive medicine. Rev Der Gen H., 2000, vol.13: 211-230.
  • Testard, J. The New Eugenics and Medicalized Reproduction. Camb Q Health Ethics, 1995, vol. 4: 304-312.
  • Testard J. Le désir du géne, París, Bourin, 1992. Citado por Andorno Roberto ¿Tenemos el derecho de modificar la especie humana? Cuad. Bioét., 1996, vol. 25 n. 1: 10-12.
  • Díaz de Terán Velasco, M.C. Derecho y nueva eugenesia. Un estudio desde la Ley 35/88 de 22 de noviembre de técnicas de reproducción asistida. Eunsa, 2005, p. 67.
  • Testard, J. y Séle, B. Toward an efficient medical eugenics: is the desirable always the feasible? Hum Reprod, 1995, vol. 10 n. 12: 3086 - 3090.
  • Herranz, G. Diagnóstico genético y eugenesia. En Pastor G., L.M. y Ferrer C., M. (eds.). La bioética en el milenio biotecnológico. Sociedad Murciana de Bioética, Murcia, 2001, págs. 142 y ss.
  • López Moratalla, N., Lago Fernandez P., M. y Santiago, E. Selección de embriones humanos. Diagnóstico genético preimplantacional. Cuad.Bioét. XXII, 2011/ 2ª, 243-258.
  • Andorno, R. Bioética y dignidad de la persona. Tecnos, 1998, Madrid, p. 76.
  • Serrano Ruiz-Calderón, J.M. Retos jurídicos de la bioética. Eiunsa, 2005, p.25.
  • Jonas, H. Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1979, Citado en : Andorno, R. ¿Tenemos el derecho de modificar la especie humana?. Cuad. Bioét., 1996, vol. 25, n. 1: 10-12.
Data source: Dialnet