TerriSchiavoBioethics

     One of the most controversial cases in the history of the United States was that of Terri Schiavo. In our Gifted and Talented class, we learned all about this case and the controversy involved. Ms Schiavo was 26 years old when her heart stopped beating and the oxygen supply to her brain was cut off. This is where the brain damage started and she later fell into a coma. She was in the coma for fifteen years and over this course of time, her husband and family were involved in several court cases. Her husband, Mr Schiavo wanted to remove the feeding tube because he believed that that is what his wife would have wanted. Legally, he was her guardian. However, her family wanted something different. They believed that the doctors should do everything possible to sustain young Terri Schiavo's life. The US Supreme Court refused to get involved in such a case since there had been no one like this before so they had no idea what to do. Judge Greer says that since Terri has no chance of recovery, the doctors may remove the feeding tube on the 3rd of January in 2003. Even the governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, gets involved by asking the court to appoint a new guardian for Terri Schiavo, but the court does not act upon this. The feeding tube was not removed earlier so the Judge orders the feeding tube to be removed on the 15th of October in 2003. Her parents petitioned the Federal Court but to no avail; Schiavo's feeding tube was removed on October 15th, 2003. A law is passed six days later. Terri's Law, which gives governor Jeb Bush the power to order doctors to feed doctors to feed Terri Schiavo. On the 23nd of October, 2003, the feeding tube is reinserted. On the 6th of May in 2004 the County Court rules that Terri's Law is unconstitutional so the law is striked down on September 23, 2004. There were several more court appeals and controversy over the next few months, same as before; should the feeding tube be removed or not? On March 18 of 2005, the US House of Representatives and the US Senate both tried to block the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, but Judge Greer ordered the tube to be removed anyway. The Senate passed a bill two days later calling for the federal court to review the case and it was signed into law by President Bush the next day. Finally, after some more controversy and dispute, Ms.Schiavo died on March 31st, 13 days after the feeding tube was removed on March 18, 2005. 
     I think that it was fine to remove Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. I mean, you could always hope for a miracle, but what are the chances of that? One in a million? Once the doctors declared Terri's coma irreversible, I think that the right thing to do would be to disconnect the feeding tube, therefore ending Terri's life. This may sound cruel, but it would be best for everyone because they could move on with their lives and Terri would be put to peace. I understand why Terri's family wanted to keep her alive, it is very hard to let go of a family member. However, her husband was looking at the reality of it, which was that Terri was not going to survive so it would only make sense to put her out of her misery. 

Natal Bioethical Issues

My ratings for natal bioethical issues from 1-9, 9 being the most controversial:


1. Natural Reproduction
2. Carrier Testing - genetic tests of parents that show the risk of passing on  a genetic disorder
3. Prenatal Testing - genetic screening of fetus for genes that cause genetic disorders
4. Fertility drugs - Prescription drugs which increase a woman’s chance of becoming pregnant
5. Artificial Insemination - insertion of sperm into female reproductive tract by syringe in a doctor's office
6. Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis for Diseases - Fertilization of sperm and egg in a Petri dish. Embryos are screened for a certain genetic disorder.  Those without the defective gene are inserted into the female reproductive tract via a syringe in a doctor’s office.
7. In Vitro Fertilization - Fertilization of sperm and egg in a Petri dish. Viable embryos are chosen and inserted into the female reproductive tract via a syringe in a doctor’s office.

8. Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis for Non-deleterious Traits - Fertilization of sperm and egg in a Petri dish. Embryos are screened for genes of non-deleterious traits (such as hair color, height, sex). Those with desired genes are inserted into the female reproductive tract via a syringe in a doctor’s office.

9. Cloning - the creation of an organism that is an exact genetic copy of another

     I thought the least controversial was the idea of natural reproduction. That is a natural everyday thing and there should not be any controversy over it other than personal problems such as whether or not one can afford to take care of their baby. I said that carrier testing was a two on the controversy scale because a couple may still want to have their baby even if they know they are going to pass on a disease. Some people may not want to reproduce knowing that they will pass on a disease, however not everyone can afford this service. The third most controversial thing on my list is prenatal testing because it isn't very controversial. I think the couple should be able to decide whether or not they want to have this done. The fourth natal bioethical issue on my list is fertility drugs because if someone is not able to reproduce, they should be allowed to try whatever they want at their own risk. The sixth thing on my list was pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for diseases. I chose to put this as number six because I think that it is fine for anyone who can't reproduce themselves to have it done in a lab. Screening for genetic disorders just prevents their child from having them which doesn't cause any harm to anyone so there shouldn't be any controversy over that. The seventh thing on my list is in Vitro fertilization because I can understand why there would be controversy over such a topic. I think that it is fine to do as long as the woman does it at her own risk. The eighth thing on my list is pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for non-deleterious traits. I think this is a highly controversial topic because some people may want to do this, but it seems wrong. When you say that you want one trait over another, you are putting down the other trait. For example, if I said I wanted brown hair and blue eyes, I would be saying that I do not want blonde hair and green eyes. The last and most controversial thing on my list is cloning. Some people may say that it is an acceptable thing while other may say that it is wrong. I, personally, think that cloning is very wrong. 

     I would stop at number 8. Natural reproduction is a part of life. Carrier and prenatal testing just test for genetic disorders so they can be prevented. Fertility drugs, artificial insemination, and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for diseases help a woman who may be having trouble reproducing to become pregnant. In Vitro fertilization also helps a woman who cannot reproduce to have a baby. Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for non-deleterious traits is wrong in my opinion. If one cannot get pregnant, they should use one of the alternatives such as fertility drugs or artificial insemination, not something where they get to "design" their baby. Cloning is another thing which I find to be very wrong. There is no need to make an identical copy of someone using their genes and DNA. If cloning became common, there would be chaos in the world. 

Gattaca Review

     In my Gifted and Talented class, we recently watched a movie called Gattaca. In this movie, parents had the option to determine their children's traits. Vincent, the main character, had a very high chance of dying early due to heart problems, he was not a "designed baby." He had a little brother, Anton, who was designed by his parents and was far more superior than Vincent. Vincent was very interested in space, but he would never be allowed to go in space because of who he was, he was an invalid. He takes the identity of a man named Jerome Morrow. He learned how to use his blood and urine samples to pass off as his own. The mission director in the movie was killed, which called for investigation. Jerome left an eyelash at the crime scene and was very close to having his identity be revealed. His brother,Anton, happened to be one of the crime investigators. They found out that the eyelash belonged to Vincent Freeman, however they could not find Vincent Freeman because he had disguised himself as someone else. In the end, Jerome was being sent on a space mission, which had always been his dream when the doctor at the gate saw his true identity. Although, for some reason, the doctor let him go through anyway and did not report him. The true Jerome Morrow ended up killing himself because his first attempt at suicide didn't work. Even with such superior abilities, he was always second best, never first. Personally, I did not like it very much. It's not that the movie was bad, it's just that I am not very into science fiction. The story line was confusing at times, but I enjoyed the ending, it made me think. I do not think the real Jerome, the man in the wheelchair, should have killed himself. I really liked the last few things Jerome (Vincent) said at the end. He said that it was surprisingly hard to leave a world in which he didn't belong, but he heard that all of his atoms were pieces of stars to begin with so maybe he was just going home after all. Overall, this movie was okay, I think anyone who is interested in science fiction would really enjoy this movie, however I am just not that interested in this genre.