LIFE DIGEST: Embryos with Alzheimer’s gene targeted

By Tom Strode - Oct 8, 2007 - comment

A British couple has decided to screen their embryos, and potentially destroy at least some of them, to prevent a child from being born with a disease that may not affect him for decades.

A British government agency has licensed a fertility clinic to conduct in vitro fertilization and to test the resulting embryos of Charl and Danielle de Beer to determine if any have inherited a gene that can result in early onset Alzheimer’s disease, according to The Telegraph. The form of dementia can impact a person as early as 35 years of age.

The Bridge Centre will implant only embryos that are not shown to be carrying the gene that leads to the disease. As a result, embryos who fail the screening will be destroyed. The method, however, has a 25 percent chance of eliminating embryos that actually do not have the genetic defect, The Telegraph reported.

Charl de Beer’s mother was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s at the age of 49 and died 15 years later, according to the British newspaper. His grandmother and two uncles also died from the disease.

Alan Thornhill, the Bridge Centre’s scientific director, said the early onset of the disease can mean an Alzheimer’s patient “has only half a life worth living,” The Telegraph reported.

A member of the President’s Council on Bioethics, however, said the selection of some embryos over others demonstrates parents do not have the right perspective on children.

This is “the way we treat products that we produce rather than gifts that we receive,” said Gilbert Meilaender, a Christian ethics professor at Valparaiso (Ind.) University, and it “strikes quite directly at our belief in the equality of human lives.”

The fact such screening would occur for a disease that would not materialize for about 40 years is particularly disconcerting, he said, according to a Sept. 28 article on World Magazine’s webzine.

If parents insist on a “perfect child or no child at all,” they should consider whether they are prepared to provide “the kind of love and acceptance that parents are supposed to give,” Meilaender said.

Planned Parenthood clinic opens after all

Planned Parenthood has received a permit to open an Aurora, Ill., clinic despite a loss in court less than two weeks before.

The city of Aurora issued the permit Oct. 1 after a county state’s attorney and two independent lawyers decided no state laws or city ordinances were broken in the application process, Mayor Tom Weisner said, according to the Chicago Tribune.

The clinic is an affiliate of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the leading abortion provider in the United States. More than 260,000 abortions were performed at PPFA clinics in the most recent year for which statistics are available.

On Sept. 20, Federal Judge Charles Norgle denied Planned Parenthood’s request for an emergency order to force the city to allow the organization to occupy the 22,000-square-foot clinic, which would make it one of PPFA’s largest centers.

The city had been seeking to determine if Planned Parenthood was guilty of fraud in applying for building permits under a different name. Gemini, Planned Parenthood’s subsidiary, said on its application it was “unknown” who the tenant would be, according to the Tribune. During a city council hearing, the newspaper reported, a Gemini spokesman said when asked about the building’s occupant: “We’re in negotiations with a tenant; we do not currently have one but we still want to move ahead.”

Planned Parenthood is not faring as well in Michigan, however. Revisions in how the state government allocates funds to such centers has resulted in the organization’s announcement it has closed, or will close, five affiliates in western Michigan, The Grand Rapids Press reported.

Planned Parenthood shut down centers in Hart and White Cloud Oct. 1, with plans to close affiliates in Grand Rapids, Mount Pleasant and Muskegon before the end of the year, according to The Press.

The change in the funding formula resulted in a loss of $700,000 to Planned Parenthood, the newspaper reported.

Clinton would lift ban on stem cell funds

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D.-N.Y., made it clear Oct. 4 she would repeal President Bush’s ban on federal funds for embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) that destroys embryos if she is elected to the country’s top office.

The leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination said Bush’s policy is a “ban on hope,” the Associated Press reported.

“The Bush administration has declared war on science,” she told the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington, according to AP. “When I am president, scientific integrity will not be the exception; it will be the rule.”

Bush issued in 2001 an order that prohibits federal grants for destructive ESCR. His rule permits funds for research on embryonic stem cell lines already in existence at the time of the announcement of the policy.

In announcing a veto in June of a bill that would have undermined his policy, the president said scientific experiments should not overrule ethics.

“If this legislation became law, it would compel American taxpayers for the first time in our history to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos,” Bush said. “I made it clear to Congress and to the American people that I will not allow our nation to cross this moral line.”

Stem cells are the body’s master cells that can develop into tissues and other cells, providing hope for the treatment of numerous afflictions. The extraction of stem cells from embryos destroys the tiny human beings, however. Embryonic research also has yet to treat any diseases in human beings and has been plagued by the development of tumors in lab animals.

Unlike research using embryos, extracting stem cells from non-embryonic sources – such as umbilical cord blood, placentas, fat and bone marrow – has nearly universal support. Such research has produced treatments for at least 73 ailments, according to Do No Harm, a coalition promoting ethics in research. These include spinal cord injuries, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis and sickle cell anemia.

The Southern Baptist Convention approved resolutions in 1999 and 2005 opposing stem cell research that destroys embryos, and the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission has been outspoken in its disapproval of reversing Bush’s policy.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Life, Abortion, Birth Control, Infertility, Stem-Cell Research, Citizenship, Christian Citizenship, Science, Bioethics

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com