Article Text

Download PDFPDF
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;

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

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 …

View Full Text

Other content recommended for you