Background
My interest in the subject of human genetic manipulation is
three-fold. 1) From a personal perspective -- as a Jewish woman who
is named after a great uncle who died fighting the Nazis and who
lost other family members in the Holocaust and as an Ashkenazi
Jewish woman who, while exposed to two cancer hot "spots" (I grew up
on Long Island and currently, live in the East Bay.), has been
incorrectly informed that my genes alone determine that I am at
higher risk for developing breast cancer and that there are genetic
tests which can predict my risk for developing breast cancer in the
future--, I am concerned about the ways in which some medical
beliefs and practices, professing to do good, can actually do harm.
2) From an activist perspective-- as a researcher, professor,
writer, policy maker, consultant, labor coach and translator, health
educator, and community organizer, my life work has been devoted to
improving women’s health. As one of the earliest interns (1979) and
a current board member of the National Women's Health
Networkii in D.C., an advocacy group for women's
health, for the past three years I have argued for the need to
develop a position paper on new genetic technologies which
anticipates the ways in which women's health will be impacted.
Treatment decisions for women currently made by the FDA will soon be
in the hands of individual scientists and clinics. 3) From a
research perspective: my current research on human genetic
technologies is an extension of my earlier doctoral research on the
social and ethical issues of reproductive technologies, including
test-tube babies and sperm banks, for infertile women in China.
iii
My paper is based on research that I conducted both as a
consultant for the Exploratory Initiative on the New Human Genetic
Technologies (Exploratory Initiative) iv this
summer and my own ongoing research. This summer, based on my
interest in women's health, I compiled: 1) an annotated bibliography
of relevant sources 2) a list of key arguments for and against germ
line alteration and human reproductive cloning 3) a list of women's
organizations and identify those that have a position on genetic
manipulation [I learned that few women's organizations have a formal
position paper on these topics with the exception of The Council on
Responsible Genetics, Boston Women's Health Collective, Resolve,
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, American Society
for Reproductive Medicine, and Breast Cancer Action which have
related paper topics.] and 4) a list of next steps which brings us
to this meeting today organized by the Exploratory Initiative and
the Boston Women's Health Book Collective.v
Introduction
In late January 2001, a breaking news story announced that a
well-known Italian infertility specialist (who had helped a 62
year-old woman become pregnant in 1994), Dr. Severino Antinori, and
his colleague, Panayiotis M. Zavos, Professor of Reproductive
Physiology at the University of Kentucky, had plans to clone human
beings within the next 12 to 24 monthsvi. Despite
recommendations by President Clinton's National Bioethics Advisory
Committee to ban human cloning as unsafe resulting in a five-year
moratorium (June 1997- June 2002) on federally funds for human
cloning, this announcement is a culmination of efforts by medical
professionals who favor human genetic manipulation to overcome
public repulsion and resistance. These scientists, researchers, and
bioethicists who favor human genetic manipulation insist that these
techniques are low risk, helpful to women and children by reducing
disease and producing a physically and mentally "superior" baby by
design, and inevitable. This paper is a critique of germ line
alteration and human reproductive cloning from the perspective of
women and women's health.
Before I describe ten mis-conceptions, I want to provide some key
definitionsvii: Somatic genetic engineering is a
gene alteration process occurring in specific organs and tissues of
an individual's body without impacting genes in future generations.
Germ line genetic engineering is a gene alteration process occurring
in germinal cells such as eggs, sperm or very early embryos which
impact every cell in the individual's body and are passed on to
future generations. Human reproductive cloning is asexual
reproduction. An egg is removed from a woman's body. The nucleus is
removed from that egg which, after it has been stripped of its
genetic materials is, called an ovacyte. The regular body cells
(skin, hair etc) or undifferentiated stem cells of another
individual (man or woman) are inserted into the ovacyte. A clone
doesn't have a genetic mother or father as in sexual reproduction
when an embryo gets half its genes from the woman's egg and half
from the man's sperm. It has a "nuclear donor" and also gains some
genetic material from the original egg.viii Stem
Cells are undifferentiated cells that can later develop into other
body parts. Stem cell research is at its earliest stages and stem
cells of different origins, including embryos and fetuses, are being
explored for research purposes. Pre-implantation diagnosis or
genetic testing is an experimental method designed to identify
genetic defects or chromosome abnormalities at two different stages:
either in an ovum (unfertilized egg) before fertilization or in an
embryo before fertilization. ix
I also want to acknowledge that very important differences are
bound to exist among and between women and women's groups about the
human genome project and new human genetic manipulations. Where
women draw the lines between acceptable and unacceptable practices
will be influenced, in part, by our multiple identities including
whether or not we are: rich, poor, rural, urban, lesbian,
transgender, heterosexual, disabled, Caucasian, Jewish, women of
color, multi-ethnic, religious or non-religious, pre or
post-menopausal, young, mid-life, old, fertile and/or infertile. And
finally, women's decisions will be influenced by our political
predilections, including our feminist leanings. For example, are we
members of the Feminist International Network of Resistance to
Reproductive and Genetic Engineering (FINRRAGE)? (Women opposed to
all new reproductive technologies on the grounds that they are
ultimately oppressive and dangerous for women); Are we post-modern
feminists? (Women who reject grand theory to explain inequalities
but as a result, may also shy away from a political position.); Are
we cyborg feminists? (Women interested in the ways we can produce
forms of resistance as part-machine/ part-human.); Are we
libertarian feminists? (Women committed to individual reproductive
liberty and procreative freedom.); or Are we egalitarian feminists?
(Women dedicated to social justice and to understanding the ways in
which social position influences the ways in which technologies are
used and inform us.).
Having said that, I now want to argue, while respecting these
differences, that we need to consider a united position, which
opposes human reproductive cloning and germ line alteration. These
new genetic techniques are not in the best interest of all women.
Women, more than men, will bear the burdens --physical,
psychological, social, moral, economic, political, and legal-- of
these technologies and any negative consequences.
CONTINUE
READING ---->