The Down’s Syndrome Debate
There has been a lot in the news lately about the new screening for Down’s syndrome and there has also been a lot of controversy following it. Previously, screening for things like Down’s syndrome involved having an amniocentesis performed, which basically involves using a very long needle to extract amniotic fluid. However, this is can be risky, as it increases the chances of having a miscarriage. From this point of view, a new and non-invasive method of screening seems like a good idea. The new method of screening for Down’s simply involves having a normal blood test, so from a medical perspective, the new test is an advancement. On top of that, it is also more accurate than having an amniocentesis, which is another big plus. However, there is still the risk of false results (although this chance is obviously somewhat higher in the old test), as some screenings can bring back a false positive result.
This ties to the main controversy around the issue of screening in general. Sure, a more accurate and less invasive screening method is great. However, the concerns lie in what happens next. Most prospective parents who find out their child has Down’s will terminate the pregnancy, and for various reasons. Therefore, one of the main concerns here is that a more accurate test could lead to fewer babies being born without Down’s, potentially ridding people of the genetic defect. People like actress Sally Phillips have been campaigning against this, asking whether we want to create a situation in which we may wipe out Down’s syndrome? Phillips’ oldest child has Down’s syndrome, and therefore can help to give another perspective to the debate. It is important to remember that conditions are much better now for people living with the condition than they have been previously – the life expectancy is higher, and more and more people with Down’s are living and working in the community with little difficulty.
There are naturally many sides to this debate, and it also raises other issues and questions which must be talked about. One big positive coming from all this is that it is in the news and it is being talked about, bringing to light many difficult conversations. Whichever way you may personally feel about the issue, it is an interesting one to discuss, and something which reminds us of the debates which are still very pertinent to medical ethics and what we do moving forward.