Moral Ethics and Treatments That Enhance the Mental and Physical Human Capabilities of Patients - Essay Example

Moral ethics and treatments that enhance the mental and physical human capabilities of patients Gene therapy and moral ethics Introduction Gene-therapy is an experimental technique that utilizes the genes to prevent or treat disease (Burley and Harris, 2002). Researchers assert that gene-therapy will allow the doctors to treat a medical disorder by inserting a gene in the patient’s body cells instead of using the traditional methods of surgery or drugs (Wartburg and Liew, 1999). Some of the approaches of gene-therapy include replacing the mutated gene that is responsible for the disease with a healthy gene (Becker, 2000). Another approach entails inserting a new gene in the body in order to fight the existing disease and also inactivating the mutated gene that is responsible for the disease (Burley and Harris, 2002). Abnormal genes will be replaced with normal and well functioning genes through homologous combination while selective reverse mutation will ensure that abnormal genes will return to the normal function (Sandel, 2007). Spindle transfer approach will ensure that the entire mitochondrion that is defective is replaced with normal mitochondria. Basically, there are two types of gene therapy that are Somatic gene therapy and Genetic gene therapy. Somatic gene therapy entails the transfer of genes in the somatic cells of the patient except the undifferentiated stem cells (Burley and Harris, 2002). On the other hand, Genetic gene therapy entails modification of the cells including the sperm cells of the patient and these genes become inheritable by the offspring of the patients thus preventing the passage of the disease to the offspring (Becker, 2000). Gene therapy has attracted intense ethical debate and controversy with the opponents asserting that it is not natural while the proponents assert that it improves the living standards of the patient and offspring (Wartburg and Liew, 1999). According to Aristotle’ ethical theory, all the scientific technique must aim at certain good and there is absolutely one final end of all sciences. The absolute end of sciences should be happiness which all sub-ends aim at attaining (Wartburg and Liew, 1999). In this case, Aristotle ethical theory is clear that happiness entails thriving life and living well. Accordingly, happiness of patients encompasses the external goods that include wholesome children and personal beauty (Burley and Harris, 2002). According to Aristotle, gene-therapy is necessary since it leads to high standards of health care thus leading to happy patients and wholesome children (Vaughn, 2009). Accordingly, the death of a patient will cause unhappiness to the friends and close family members thus doctors should conduct gene-therapy in order to save the life of the patient (Kelly, 2007). Human beings have the intellectual capacity to research and develop scientific technologies that are essential in improving the health and well being of the population such as the gene therapy (Becker, 2000). However, opponents of Aristotle argue that gene therapy is not virtuous since it may later lead to unhappiness on the patient (Giacca, 2010). Opponents of this argument assert that gene therapy has problems with viral-vectors and patients may suffer from inflammatory responses and toxicity in their after some time. In addition, most occurring medical complications such as high blood pressure and arthritis can be attributed to gene therapy since it combines a variation of the natural gene combination (Giacca, 2010). Aristotle claims that a virtuous person will aim at the mean and virtues are concerned with actions and emotions. Virtues are determined by reasons and prudent individuals such as doctors have the capacity to determine a virtue (Burley and Harris, 2002). Virtue ethics does not emphasize on any particular consequences or rules of behaviour, but focuses on the moral virtues of the actor (Giacca, 2010). It considers the innate character traits of the actor such as generosity and courage of the person. Doctors are expected to display compassion and care for the life of the patients, and at the same time resist any desires or passions that may harm the health of the patient. Genetically, making alterations to the genes leads to enhancements in cognition, mood and body strength (Kelly, 2007). However, the controversy lies on whether individuals are ethical in trying to make their life ‘more perfect’ through use of gene therapy. It is unethical to use gene therapy in improving the abilities of an individual. Unlike natural ability enhancers such a coffee that increases the brain alertness and body stamina, gene therapy should not be used to enhance the brain function since it is not natural (Burley and Harris, 2002). Gene therapy leads to a more personalized patient care unlike the drugs that are not intended to treat a specific medical problem (Kelly, 2007). Drugs and surgeries are not efficient since they are manufactured and designed for the whole population, unlike gene therapy that treats the exact unique problem of the patient (Burley and Harris, 2002). In addition, the freedom of choice and liberty is essential and patients should have a choice of their preferred mode of treatment. Parents are morally right in controlling the modifying the genetic composition of their children before they are born. Accordingly, the offspring will not suffer from any negative trait thus will escape bullying or low self-esteem when interacting with their peers (Giacca, 2010). Proponents of gene-therapy argue that it may be the only method of treating certain diseases or preventing the unavoidable illnesses. For instance, the individuals with a family history of genetic diseases can be screened and treated with gene-therapy through inserting a new gene in order to prevent the individual from developing the illness in his later age (Burley and Harris, 2002). Somatic gene-therapy will help in correcting the diseases where traditional medical care procedures such as surgery or drugs have failed (Vaughn, 2009). Doctors are bound to provide the highest possible medical care to the patient thus this technology will lead to elimination of diseases such as immunodeficiency, hemophilia and color blindness (Kelly, 2007). In addition, gene-therapy strengthens the immune system of the body unlike use of drugs that contains chemicals and toxins that have adverse body reactions thus weakening the body immune system (Giacca, 2010). The opponents of gene therapy assert that it is unnatural since individuals lose the giftedness. Religious groups argue that doctors should not play the role of God by attempting to create a new scientific type of human being (Sandel, 2007). In addition, gene therapy will create two distinct social classes since some people have no access to gene therapy. This technology will interfere with the equality of all human beings since it cannot fulfill the desire of every human individual (Giacca, 2010). Accordingly, gene therapy diminishes the moral virtue of caring for others and perpetuates the attitudes of rejecting the human life in its normal and natural form. The virtues of humility and responsibility will also be diminished by gene therapy since individuals in the society will move away from accepting their genetic composition as a unique talent or gift (Kelly, 2007). This technology will pressurize the society to take more look for genetic traits that lead to success thus diminishing the ethical virtues of helping and caring for the less fortunate in the society because individuals will be more responsible for their own success (Kelly, 2007). According to consequentialism ethics, the final outcomes of gene therapy may be adverse to the patient health. Some medical researchers have pointed out that gene therapy may induce tumor if it is integrated in the wrong place. For instance, the new genes may interfere with the functioning of the tumor-suppressor genes (Vaughn, 2009). In addition, previous clinical trials have confirmed that X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency (X-SCID) patients have a higher likelihood of developing tumor after gene therapy. All the foreign genes that are introduced in the human tissue will lead to hyper stimulation of the immune system ultimately reducing the effectiveness of gene therapy (Vaughn, 2009). Introduction of gene therapy paves was for the slippery slope since researchers will look for advanced and unethical technologies of curing natural disorders such as poor eyesight and baldness (Sandel, 2007). In this regard, doctors may ignore the value of ethics in their professions thus leading to diminishment of quality of patient health care (Sandel, 2007). Opponents of gene therapy assert that using gene therapy is not a curative method, but a form of trying to enhance the ability and capacity of human beings. They assert human beings have for long lived a normal lifestyle even with disabilities thus no artificial enhancement is necessary (Giacca, 2010). Another critical argument against germ line therapy is that future generations should be accorded the opportunity to decide their health status. Germ line gene therapy affects thousands of future descendants thus leading to change in the general human being capabilities. Gene therapy should only be used for curing diseases and not enhancing the human capabilities such as intelligent (Vaughn, 2009). Conclusion In my opinion, I believe that gene therapy should be permissible in the treatment of diseases such as cystic fibroids and not enhancing the genetic traits of the offspring. Doctors should not create an illusion that gene therapy can enhance the brain functioning and make human beings live an above average lifestyle relative to normal individual. It is the duty of the doctors to provide the patients with information of the multiple types of treatments and their weaknesses. In addition, doctors should strive to ensure that patients attain the highest possible standard of health care. Reference list: Becker, G.K. 2000. The moral status of persons” perspectives on bioethics. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Burley, J and Harris, J. (2002). A companion to genethics. Malden: Blackwell Publishers. Giacca, M. 2010. Gene therapy. New York: Springer. Kelly, E.B. 2007. Gene therapy. Westport, CT. Greenwood press. Sandel, M.J. 2007. The case against perfection: ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Vaughn, L. 2009. Contemporary moral arguments: readings in ethical issues.Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wartburg, W.P and Liew, J. 1999. Gene technology and social acceptance. Lanhalm: University Press of America. Read More