PGD (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis) is embryo-screening that looks for DNA abnormalities (such as genes for cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease, down syndrome, and even gender) if a couple uses in-vitro fertilization to conceive a child (“What Is PGD?”). It causes a lot of debate today because embryos that have certain diseases can be discarded, which some may consider abortion. It also calls other ethical ideas into question: if parents can discard embryos for being a certain gender, what would stop them from discarding dumber, weaker kids in favor of more intelligent and athletically gifted kids?

A study from the Oxford Journals comparing PGD births to babies conceived through intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), both artificial reproduction methods, sought to see if babies born from PGD suffered any health risks compared to babies born through sperm injections. This study monitored all babies born at the Vrije Universiteit Brussels (VUB) between 1992 and 2005. The doctors watched 581 babies and sent questionnaires to their parents when the babies turned 2-months old. However, the control was a group of babies conceived through ICSI “to determine whether potential differences in outcome were exclusively related to the embryo biopsy in PGD and not to assisted reproduction technology (ART) in general” (Oxford Journals). However, in this study the control was not babies conceived naturally, which I feel could have given a fuller picture on the effects of PGD as well as artificial reproduction as a whole. Measuring “gestational ages at delivery, birth weights and major malformations,” they found few differences between the two groups of babies except for the PGD babies were more likely to be born prematurely and weigh less at birth (Oxford Journals). They are continuing to monitor the babies now (this was done in 2009) and have concluded that generally PGD does not affect the health of babies conceived through this method.

However, the unpredictable consequence of the upcoming prominence of PGD is how it could affect the dynamic of the family, something science cannot concretely cover especially this early in the process. Leon Kass, a chair on the President’s Bioethics Council in the United States, claims that parents will start to see their child as property since the selection of features through PGD can “turn the child into ‘manufacture’ and thus impairs human flourishing” (Oxford Journals). This has already been documented in this New York Times article “Wanting Babies Like Them” where it was reported that deaf and blind couples only selected embryos through PGD that carried genes for the same disorder they had. Of the 190 PGD clinics surveyed, 5-6 of them reported cases where babies were chosen based on disabilities found in their DNA. Through a series of anecdotes (this article is not entirely based on the study but instead looks into surrounding view points on the scientific material), the reporter best portrays the conflict when one parent asks her, “What is life going to be like for her, when her parents are different than she is?” (New York Times)

Obviously, PGD is still fresh on the scene. It is unclear how it affects the births of children as well as family dynamics since those born of PGD are not old enough to have encountered many obstacles. Only time will tell how this affects us as a society. As Sanghavi ends the New York Times article, “Of course, part of me wonders whether speaking the same language or being the same height guarantees closer families. But it’s not for me to say. In the end, our energy is better spent advocating for a society where those factors won’t matter.”