Attitudes toward genetic engineering: the dilemma of the genetically abnormal child.

Abstract

Ethicists and scientists have grappled with issues of genetic engineering for years, yet the position of the lay public on this topic remains largely unexplored. This study examines the attitudes of potential consumers — i.e., women of childbearing age — toward seven medical procedures for genetic engineering. We define genetic engineering as the use of medical procedures to terminate the life or prevent the birth of a genetically abnormal child. This article considers the following procedures: passive euthanasia, amniocentesis, abortion, genetic screening, sterilization, artificial insemination with donor sperm, and in vitro fertilization with a donor egg. The only two procedures that a majority of the women surveyed find acceptable are genetic screening and amniocentesis. Many women, however, apparently do not know enough about genetic engineering procedures to make informed decisions about their use. By far the most important predictor of attitudes toward genetic engineering procedures is frequency of participation in religious observances; the more frequent the participation, the more negative the attitudes. This suggests that decisions about genetic engineering are now and will continue to be based on both ideology and information. Thus, any campaign designed to raise the level of public understanding about genetic science and technology should confront the moral issues inherent in this field and in its application to human beings.