Abstract
AbstractPrenatal genomics appears to be on an expansive trajectory toward universally-available, routine, whole-genome prenatal sequencing. But for people living with disabilities, this expansion of prenatal genomics may not be a welcome development. This chapter explores some of the objections arising from the community of people with disabilities, and articulates a defense of one particular form of objection: the claim that the expansion of prenatal genomics expresses negative messages about people with disabilities.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference49 articles.
1. Aymé, S. 2016. If rare diseases are so rare, why do they matter? On Biology. https://blogs.biomedcentral.com/on-biology/2016/02/29/if-rare-diseases-are-so-rare-why-do-they-matter/. Accessed 22 June 2018.
2. Baylis, F. 2017a. Gene editing: Where should we draw the line? Impact Ethics. https://impactethics.ca/2017/10/25/gene-editing-where-should-we-draw-the-line/. Accessed 26 Feb 2018.
3. Baylis, F. 2017b. Genome editing of human embryos broadens ethics discussions. The Conversation. http://theconversation.com/genome-editing-of-human-embryos-broadens-ethics-discussions-84888. Accessed 15 Feb 2018.
4. Benn, P., K.J. Curnow, S. Chapman, S.N. Michalopoulos, J. Hornberger, and M. Rabinowitz. 2015. An economic analysis of cell-free DNA non-invasive prenatal testing in the US general pregnancy population. PLoS One 10: e0132313.
5. Boyd, P.A., M. Loane, E. Garne, et al. 2011. Sex chromosome trisomies in Europe: Prevalence, prenatal detection and outcome of pregnancy. European Journal of Human Genetics 19: 231–234.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献