Week 10

Stem Cells:

My first reaction to this article was almost shocked that the word clone actually came from the Greek word clonos. I was actually expecting that it would be branched off from a Latin root. According to this article by Aurelia, there are several pros and cons of cloning. Some of the pros that caught my attention was using cells and tissue to create organs which could be used to save a person's life. I thought it was amazing that our technology as evolved over the years to make miracles like these happen. The only issue is how morally right is it to use human cells for cloning? In my opinion, I felt as though it wasn't okay to use cells to clone humans. Organs are one thing, but another human being exactly the same as another, I feel isn't okay. The article also mentioned how the clone wouldn't be a real person. Then what is it? Another form of a being? I would argue that the clone would be a person. A human being, is a human being. Not just a carbon copy. I thought it was also interesting how the article talked about how cloning could be considered playing God. In a sense, I can see where the author was coming from, especially when it is believed that God created each of us, that we are altering the miracle of life. But then again, isn't creating life already a miracle?

Cloning Comeback:

This article was written by David Cyranoski. This specific article talked about how famous cloning researcher, Hwang, from Seoul Korea made a comeback in his career after being involved in a scientific outbreak fraud. It was hard knowing that his career and his image plumetted but it was also amazing to see what the scientific outbreak in later years did for him and the University he studied at. He began getting more supporters from the government, other researchers and he was even getting legal recognition for his claim of creating that line of cloned human embryonic cells. It's fascinating to know how far science can go and how fragile the topic of cloning can be. He then began to become famous for his promise to his country to bring cloned cattle after he create the first full cloned bull. Cloning animals for his country would bring an ample amount of profit and also create an improved image and reputation. He then established Sooam which is using their cloned cows for special treatment using their milk. Although he was getting famous over the years, it didn't mean he was struggling with other controversies in between. I guess being a scientist is almost like being a celebrity except there is so much more at stake then a racy photo. At this point Dr. Hwang has already taken so many risks and second chances but he was able to pick himself back up every time.

Stem Cells from Hastings Center:

This article basicallhy gives an outline and background of stem cells; what we can do with them. This type of research is expanding greatly and is giving breakthroughs for treatment in different diseases and health conditions like diabetes and Parkinsons. Researchers and doctors are using the improvement in stem cells research to really understand more about other diseases, illnesses to hopefully find treatments for them. One of the only concerns about this type of research includes how much recognition and positive treatment embryo donors would receive. In my opinion it's almost like how much appreciation a surrogate mother should receive. Based from the article, I also found it interesting that there is such thing as IPS which reprograms human skin cells. I never thought that human cells could be "reprogrammed". Some of the things that need to be done in order to make stem cell research more successful is getting it standardized basically, or approved. Especially considering we are talking about using and testing humans. I think that in the next 20 years, this stem cell research will have a break through. I mean, considering how far we've already come with the technology we already have..I feel like we can get there. My only concern is, how will be ensure that if it happens, we won't abuse it?

Week 8

Teens With Lesbian Mothers:

Right away, one question struck me..Why does it even matter that their parents could be gay? I've known several friends that have gay parents and they are just as normal as someone with heterosexual parents. My friend whose parents are two gay men, and his orientation is straight. But regardless of whether this would've influenced him to turn gay or not, why does it matter? What I found that was interesting though, was that those adolescents that were raised in women-headed families were found to be at a lower risk of depression, anxiety, hostility and abusing alcohol in contrast to those who were raised in a heterosexual household.However there weren't many significant differences between the two groups when it came to making relationships, sexual behavior, delinquency and in psychological adjustments. The National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study claimed that teens that reached the age of 17 in lesbian families were higher in social, school and total competence. They were also lower in having social problems, breaking rules and having violent behavior in comparison to those raised in a heterosexual household. I think that some of the reasons why the teens of lesbian mothers say that they've taught them how to be accepting of everyone includes the idea that they had to learn that the rest of society may or may not accept them. The best thing to do is to be kindhearted and be a good role model to everyone else. From the study, you can conclude that teens with lesbian mothers had overall high grades.


After reading the article, I was still curious to see or hear an actual story. Although these parents may not be lesbian, they are of the same sex.
In this video, Alex had technically 4 parents whom were all gay. He said that he found that kids who had gay parents were more humble in his opinion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9xfHqT1HEY

I watched another short film that had a young boy that was wearing a "Some people are gay. Get over it" I thought that was really cute and inspiring for someone of that age to make such a small move with a big message.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG0yqhzVuYA

Disadvantages of parenting after 40:

Prior to reading this article, I had an idea that having a child at such a late age could affect the health of the mother as well as the unborn child. However, it made sense to me when the parent in the article said that they were more ready to raise a family now than 20 years ago. Kind of like going to school., everyone expects students to go to college right after graduation but in reality some people just aren't mentally ready or mature to pay thousands of dollars to go to school-too much responsibility. Take time to transition I guess and to live their adulthood. Some couples I know are almost in their 30s and waited til then to have a child because they wanted to enjoy each other's company, without a child yet. There's also the idea that maybe saving money takes time, and you honestly need some time of money to take care of a family. Having a child isn't cheap.I liked how they mentioned in the article that as they got older and focused on their high achievements, they could, when they're ready, adjust their attention to raising a family.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHl__2shixg
Some disadvantages though in being a laterlife parent is that they might not have as much energy to keep up with the responsibility of raising a newborn, let alone a toddler.
Other disadvantages could include the fact that laterlife mothers would have a more difficult time conceiving and so they would need to go through the process of IVF.
Another issue that came up in the article was that the parents or the  mother would have less time to spend with their children because of their age. It's only a part of their lifetime that has passed but it's also a part they won't be able to spend with their kids when they're born.

Reading this article made me think of the oldest mother of twins that I saw in the Guiness Book of world records. I questioned at first why she would want to try having kids at such an old age but I suppose she had thought about it long enough and had her rational reasons.

Week 7

Consideration of the Gestational Carrier:

At first, I didn't quite understand what the author of the article meant by people suggesting that having a gestational carrier deliver the baby was in some sense, a commodity of the body. But then I realized that they are technically being payed to hold a child for future parents that aren't able to have one of their own naturally. I believe that in a way, they should be screened psychologically because how do we know we can trust the potential mother with a child that will not be her own? It is only for the safety of the child. When it said that the surrogate mother, if on a contract, can end the pregnancy whenever they want, it concerned me because that is a life they are taking away. Is that really okay for a mother to change her mind? It's kinda like if a regular surrogate mother was about 7months pregnant and decided she isn't ready to have a child, how would they even end the pregnancy at that point? You can't just press rewind, yenno? In addition to that controversy, there's also the issue that maybe the gestational carrier could lie about health conditions and ask for compensation. This is, in my opinion, manipulative and isn't morally right especially when the potential parents are already paying the mother to bear their child because they aren't able to. But to lie just so they can get extra money in their pocket isn't right, at all. In some states, they argue that giving compensation to the gestational carrier is technically not selling the child or her body. I agree with the idea that the carrier should at least be 21 years old and have had a successful delivery of a baby prior to being a carrier. This ensures the future parents can trust that she can delivery their child safely as well. It is also smart that they do psychological background checks to make sure she is mentally stable to hold the child for that period of time and give birth to them; that they will be a trustworthy carrier of a human being that may not be her own.


Sibling Donors:
I don't know where I stand with this article because it really is only fair that if there is a program with the science to find genetic matches of siblings, that there be a fee, in my opinion. But at the same time, I don't agree with it because what if someone doesn't have enough money to find their sibling, shouldn't they also have the right to get the confirmation that it's possible that someone could be their brother or sister? What I found that was interesting was how many successful findings of half siblings there were according to the article. Apparently there were a maximum of 13 half siblings that were found by an average person that was searching for their family member.The article including remarks from siblings and how much they valued finding their biological families. Some seriously just wanted a picture of their donor, and to me, that really made me reevaluate how I saw my own family especially considering I see them all the time.The article talked about the triggers of even wanting to search for siblings which included a change in their life, like growing up. What I found that was really satisfhying to know was that the siblings that were able to find their donor, or donor sibling continued to stay in contact with them. They may not have grown up with each other but they are family. That's what matters in my opinion. This article kind of reminded me of how teens or young adults try to find their biological parents once they get older.

Week 6

Coping With Disfigurement:

I thought it was interesting to read about the effects of having a disfigurement. Especially when the article talked about how people can associate myths of evil with disfigurements. This I can kind of relate to because I had instances where family would joke around saying that it's bad luck for someone to be born with a birthmark. My cousin who had the birthmark came with us somewhere, and when we arrived, they were closed. So everyone pretty much blamed it on her. I mean, I thought it was just a cultural myth type of thing but I guess there are other groups of people that view disfigurements as a negative thing. I thought it was sad seeing that people with disfigurements are more likely to be depressed or to have negative psychological effects from it. I understand how they would be more likely, it's just very unfortunate. I definitely disagree with that myth that you have to be physically attractive in order to be successful. Personally, I've dealt with self confidence issues, however, for people to think that you have to look good in order to have a good life- that's really dumb in my opinion. It shouldn't be determined by the way you look, success is found through actions and confidence.

Adolescents Perspective with TCS:

I never heard of TCS before reading this article so it was a little difficult for me to understand what these teens were diagnosed with. However, I learned from this article that it could affect physical appearance and things like breathing. It's nice to know that these teens believe that although they may look a little different, they don't deserve to be treated any different from someone that didn't have TCS. The article had many topics that were touched including how teens dealt with social acceptance, self acceptance, and just how they managed the negativity. The reading said that they say that they are able to make regular close friendships and relationships with people just the same as anyone else their age. It was also kind of sad to hear that they aren't able to do certain things because of it- this could lead to feeling left out or deprived of the teenage life, like pool parties or something. Some teens say they stand out and they're not ashamed of it- they're proud of themselves for being different. Teens in this reading also say that over time, although it's difficult to accept that they are different, they are managing. I feel like all teens go through acceptance issues anyway, so having TCS shouldn't prevent a growing young adult to feel any different. We are all different anyway.

Androgen Sensitivity Syndrome:

This article was a bit of a touchy subject for me. I never really understood that there was a syndrome where an individual could be categorized as either gender. I feel like it is up to the person to decide who they want to be entirely. I also just googled that there are actually models that are diagnosed with AIS, which I thought was interesting. It was a little weird for me to see the actually genitalia of a person who was diagnosed with it, but it did help me understand what it meant to have the syndrome. The article mentioned the issue of being categorized as a specific gender. Peggy Cadet who is the author of this article is the cousin of the patient mentioned in previous articles. The author talked about how he originally was told when he was younger that it was confirmed medically that he was to be identified as a male. It wasn't until later on that he realized he had AIS and that it would be ideal for him to continue life living as a female. He believed that people be who they want to be, to forget about the "ideal" and just to live life with the gender you target to be. I liked how he mentioned that if people didn't become the gender they wanted, there wouldn't be transgendered individuals. The author also mentioned that the way children act can influence the way they see themselves and what gender they want to be percieved as. I agree because you can somewhat tell how they want to be seen by the way their personality is, whether it's more feminine or masculine.

Revealing of the diagnosis:

This article talks about the issue of telling a woman that she actually has the genotypes of a male. I think that revealing that the patient had this genotype at such a late time in her life would complicate things. I feel that it's best to tell that individual that they are diagnosed with this syndrome around teen years. This is the time that their body is changing and they begin to deal with image issues anyway. I feel like it would make more sense to do it then so they'd have time to figure out themselves, who they want to be and what they want to do about their situation early on as opposed to later in adulthood.It might make matters worse later in adulthood especially when they get involved with person relationships. Like what if a girl who was supposed to be a male was with a man she did love and later in life she learns that she was supposed to be a male as well, will her partner love her the same way? I would hope to think so, but that might not be the case.

Week Feb 10

MERP. So after reading Savenlusec's paper, I've honestly come to realize that there are pros and cons for gene selection. He used the idea of a scenario where parents would have been able to choose a child that would not have a predisposition for asthma. Choosing the child without the predisposition with asthma would give them a better life apparently. Okay, so I have asthma. And I am completely fine. Yes, there are activities that I can do with some limitation but it doesn't mean I have a bad life. I can make my life as best of a life I can based on the way I appreciate it. Asthma doesn't hold me back. I think that gene selection for non-disease genes isn't morally right. Why are we creating the perfect child. I believe that children are a blessing, not a being we can mold into the perfect child. Regardless if the child has a disability or not, it is up to the parents on how they raise their child in the long-run. They can still have a happy life.

Week 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlgYXaIdr7E
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/NlgYXaIdr7E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 This is what hit me the most. This video alone represents my view of abandoning baby girls. I stay hopeful for change. The first article was mainly about the sex preference in China. In basic terms, the article mentioned how boys were preferred because of the belief that the male dominance reflected in workforce and over all success in life. They mentioned that the issue causes infanticide and abandonment of baby girls in the country, not just China though. The effects of having such high ratio of boys and girls is that there could be difficulties finding wives, and even depression in men because they wouldn't have a partner in life. Solutions mentioned included removing the selective sex of children in China and also selective sex abortion. According to the article, global SRB should be at its peak and is hopefully going to be winding down. This is good because the negative effects of it have really taken a toll on these countries culture and their outlook of both genders.


Journal of Child Neurology:

Ouu, this particular article was extremely interesting to me. The thought of choosing the traits of  partner and having the same predispositions for your future child seemed really interesting. The article basically talked about how we have come to that stage where it is possible to have children using selected genes from partners. Or at least the idea of it, preimplantation of genes. The whole point in the beginning of this idea was to prevent disease, almost like selections of embryos. How morally right is selecting embryos? I think that although it is an interesting topic, the whole designer baby thought kind of fits with it. You pretty much are planning what your future child would look or be like on the inside. I feel like it isn't okay to do this because if a trait is meant to be it's meant to be, not necessarily because we make it happen ourselves. I feel like this is somewhat playing God's plan. One solution mentioned in the article was that American Medical Association made it immorally right to do an implantation of genes with the motive of choosing genes that aren't medically/ disease concerning. If they were just physical traits for example, this would not be legal or right. Another problem aside from that ethical issue incudes the price of the study and the practice itself. We also have to think about how much it would cost to make this method of gene selection possible, according to the article. It makes sense; I mean seriously, it would cost more money thinking about the traits of your baby than to raise the baby you will love regardless as he or she is.

Week 3

I personally think it's interesting that many patients of IVF desire having twins. It is unfortunate that they are at higher risk of complications after being born though. Having the choice of having twins seems really "cool" but doesn't that kind of ruin the surprise of having a child? Knowing the sex of the child is one thing but being able to choose how many embryos seems a little too much for me, personally. I believe that considering the children would overall be at higher risk of having a shorter life, we should reevaluate the option of have IVF twins. This article talked about a number of things including the risks of having more than one birth after IVF. The risks include having a higher risk of C section and it also affects the life of the future child. Including being born prematurely. The article also talked about the restrictions of embryo transers. The whole right of setting a limit happened because of the forced steralization that happened a while back. It makes sense in a way but it also just seems unfair. In addition, the article mentioned the benefits of being in the medical field. These included being able to regulate the practice yourself, you carry out what needs to be done to make medical break throughs. I thought it was interesting that we actually have SART regulations that need to be followed in order to carry out reproductive study practices. It's good, in my opinion because there should be rules. We are dealing with future lives here. It also talked about the crucial and significant relationship there is evidently amond the patients and their physician. When it comes to having a child, a patient trust their doctor to ensure that their child will come out healthy, that they will do anything they can to save them and the mother. The trust is there because we expect people in the medical field to basically know their material. I feel like this is why we spend so much money on medicals because we believe in the science so much.

Celine Dion had IVF twins?!


Setting a limit for how many embryos are allowed to be "made" transferred, I suppose seems fine but then again it takes away the freedom and choices for the potential parent of those children.