rss
J Med Ethics 2004;30:538 doi:10.1136/jme.2002.002782
  • Reproduction

Commodification of children again and non-disclosure preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Huntington’s disease

  1. M Spriggs
  1. Correspondence to:
 M Spriggs
 Ethics Unit, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Royal Childrens Hospital, Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria, 3052, Australia; Centre for the Study of Health and Society, University of Parkville, University of Melbourne, Australia; Monash University Centre for Human Bioethics, Australia; merle.spriggsmcri.edu.au

    When is commodification acceptable?

    Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is usually restricted to couples who are eligible for in vitro fertilisation (IVF)—infertile couples or those with a history of genetic disease. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in England and the Infertility Treatment Authority (ITA) in Australia have both given permission for PGD with tissue typing to detect human leucocyte antigen (HLA) compatibility in order to save an existing sibling with a life threatening condition. The procedure has also been carried out in the United States.1

    Heavy criticism followed the February 2002 ruling of England’s HFEA to allow a family to try for a child who is free of thalassaemia and a “perfect match” for a sick sibling.2 Then in August …

    Register for free content

    The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

    Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.