Abstract
This imaginative guide to decision-making about prenatal genomics is situated in a not-too-distant future in which parents can easily choose among embryos from gametes that have been produced in a laboratory using their own skin cells. Readers are invited into a future vision of conscientious parenting that involves testing to protect, rather than to select, a future child.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Resources for Further Reading
Asch, Adrienne and David Wasserman. 2005. Where is the sin in synecdoche?: prenatal testing and the parent-child relationship. In Quality of life and human difference: Genetic testing, health care, and disability, ed. Wasserman, David, Robert Wachbroit, and Jerome Bickenbach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bianchi, Diana W. 2012. From prenatal genomic diagnosis to fetal personalized medicine: progress and challenges. Nature Medicine, 18 (7): 1041.
Chen, Stephanie C., and David T. Wasserman. 2017. A framework for unrestricted prenatal whole-genome sequencing: Respecting and enhancing the autonomy of prospective parents. The American Journal of Bioethics 17 (1): 3–18. [see accompanying Open Peer Commentaries and Response]
Cohen, I. Glenn, George Q. Daley, and Eli Y. Adashi. 2017. Disruptive reproductive technologies. Science Translational Medicine 9(372).
Dondorp, Wybo, Guido De Wert, Yvonne Bombard, Diana W. Bianchi, Carsten Bergmann, Pascal Borry, Lyn S. Chitty et al. 2015. Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy and beyond: challenges of responsible innovation in prenatal screening. European Journal of Human Genetics 23 (11): 1438.
Flores, Homero, Joseph Lee, Jorge Rodriguez-Purata, Georgia Witkin, Benjamin Sandler, and Alan B. Copperman. 2014. Beauty, brains or health: Trends in ovum recipient preferences. Journal of Women’s Health 23 (10): 830–833.
Greely, Henry T. 2018. Human Reproduction in the Twenty-First Century. Journal of Posthuman Studies 1 (2): 205–223.
Hendriks, Saskia, Wybo Dondorp, Guido de Wert, Geert Hamer, Sjoerd Repping, and Eline AF Dancet. 2015. Potential consequences of clinical application of artificial gametes: a systematic review of stakeholder views. Human Reproduction Update 21 (3): 297–309.
Lyerly, Anne Drapkin, Elena A. Gates, Robert C. Cefalo, and Jeremy Sugarman. 2001. Toward the ethical evaluation and use of maternal-fetal surgery.” Obstetrics & Gynecology 98 (4): 689–697.
Minear, Mollie A., Stephanie Alessi, Megan Allyse, Marsha Michie, and Subhashini Chandrasekharan. 2015. Noninvasive prenatal genetic testing: Current and emerging ethical, legal, and social issues. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 16: 369–398.
Wasserman, David. 2015. Disability Perspectives. In Prenatal and Preimplantation Diagnosis, 229–245. Cham: Springer.
Wasserman, David. 2018. Fetal Medicine and the Pregnant Woman. Hastings Center Report 48 (2): inside-back.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wasserman, D. (2022). An Intelligent Parents Guide to Prenatal Testing: Having a Well-Born Child Without Genomic Selection. In: Allyse, M.A., Michie, M. (eds) Born Well: Prenatal Genetics and the Future of Having Children. The International Library of Bioethics, vol 88. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82536-2_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82536-2_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-82535-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-82536-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)