Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

Hot on Facebook
Man Tries to Order Priciest Starbucks Drink Ever Total cost: $23.60 »

Safer Down Syndrome Tests Give Birth to Ethics Fears

Procedures look safer, more accurate, but raise ethics concerns

By Matt Cantor,  Newser Staff

Posted Feb 24, 2009 11:23 AM CST

(Newser) – New tests to detect Down syndrome early in pregnancy look highly promising to some experts—but they’re prompting new ethical and medical questions, the Washington Post reports. The procedures, to be publicly available in June, appear safer and more accurate than current options. But Down syndrome and anti-abortion activists fear they could increase terminated pregnancies, while some doctors worry more testing is needed before they’re marketed.

The tests use a pregnant woman’s blood and are less invasive than current procedures. “We have a history in this country of a eugenics movement where people tried to eliminate certain people from the gene pool,” says one of the tests' detractors. Meanwhile, others worry expecting parents could get flawed information about Down syndrome. “We have a nation of physicians who are unprepared for explaining a diagnosis,” said a doctor.

Soon-to-be-available Down syndrome tests look more accurate and safer than current ones.
Soon-to-be-available Down syndrome tests look more accurate and safer than current ones.   (Shutterstock)
New tests are raising ethical concerns among some activists.
New tests are raising ethical concerns among some activists.   (Shutterstock)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

For 50 years, folks have been working to develop a noninvasive genetic test for Down syndrome. People have described it as the Holy Grail of genetic testing. We are on the cusp of delivering that. - Harry Stylii, CEO, Sequenom

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
A snapshot of the day's best news stories.
 
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 7 comments
Guest
Feb 24, 2009 10:30 PM CST
Didn't Palin admit to having her own doubts about the child, hence her hiding the pregnancy from her children?
Guest
Feb 24, 2009 7:40 PM CST
(1) that's easy: yes; (2) sentence doesn't make sense; (3) "developmentally disabled" just doesn't roll of the tongue like "REtard" does, now does it?
Guest
Feb 24, 2009 2:36 AM CST
Are you implying that Sarah Palin is not a parent in her right mind? Also, the only reason why there is a stigma attached to the word "retard" is because of the decencies themselves. Fifty years ago, retard was the accepted term, and I'm guessing that fifty years from now, developmentally disabled will carry the same negativity that retard does today.

More Newser Stories

Palin's Critics Bitter Over Own Abortions

New Prenatal Gene Test Proves Safer

Doc Who Aborted Wrong Fetus Loses License

Down Syndrome on Decline as Moms Abort

Fetuses Form Memories: Study


NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   Betty Confidential   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Fark   |   Timelines   |   The Frisky   |   Geek Sugar   |   NewsOne