Genetic screening can significantly benefit society if used in an ethical manner. It can eliminate some unforeseen distress and suffering. However, issues such as privacy, discrimination, social engineering, and consent are potential barriers.
A scientific study carried out in the US has shown that sexual orientation in men is influenced by genes. The study tested the DNA of 400 gays and established a section of the X chromosome called Xq28. The scientist speculated that this region of the X genome impacted men’s sexual behavior. Another similar study established a DNA strand on chromosome 8 that can potentially influence sexual orientation in men. However, the procedure used to conduct the two biological studies raised a lot of questions. Therefore, it is important to withhold these findings from the public domain.
Every effort to publish this research is met with a lot of challenges. For instance, the scientist Dean Hamer raised controversies when he tried to publish the findings of his research. The study received a lot of criticism from geneticists.
Genetic testing is a very expensive process; the rich can only afford to pay for it. The lower class feels alienated and human right activist warn that if the gene patenting proceeds, the costs can shoot up. Experts argue that wealthy families can afford genetic testing and the problem remains with the poor (Dahir 65).
The public can interpret the results of such discoveries differently. Hamer opted to detract from his findings after he learned that the general public had a different perception. For instance, people started to prospect for a possible prenatal test for the Xq28 gene. The Daily Mail headline read Abortion Hope after Gay Gene finding. Hamer, in response, downplayed any attempt to publish homosexuality tests saying that it is outright “wrong”, unethical, and “terrible” research abuse. The procedure for prenatal testing is very cumbersome, it requires a sample of amniotic fluid. The mother can have a miscarriage in the process (Intz).
Any genetic research on sexual orientation, in most cases, appears to have followed a flawed procedure. A genetics study conducted on identical twins of a gay contradicted the earlier findings when tested for Xq28 genome. If the discovery established from the latter research is anything to go by, then the twins are more likely to be “straight” rather than gays.
The researchers also failed to account for lesbianism. The Xq28 factor is present in both genders. However, relying on the flawed research, the scientists established that this gene played a significant role in determining male sexual orientation only. They could not attribute it to lesbianism, yet the gene is more prevalent in the female species.
Another concern that stems out of this research is that many homosexuals have been forced to seek treatment and possibly change their sexual behavior to avoid homophobia. However, a section of scientists has raised questions about the effectiveness of such therapeutic measures. “Conversion” therapists [sic] can even include electroshock, genital mutilation, and brain surgery to treat the disorder. The outcome of such medical practices can be deleterious (Menon 65).
Another issue that arises with the study is privacy. The outcome of the research is not limited to the research team only. Alliance of Genetic Support Group warns that genetic research information can become “known to other persons other than the research team.” Thus, the family known for having the disorder can get discriminated (Intz).
This research should not continue because society is highly homophobic, and the findings can encourage abortion.
Bibliography
Dahir, Mubarak. Why Are We Gays? 20 (1999): 65. Print.
Intz, Zoe. “Does A ‘Gay Gene’ Exist? New Study Says ‘Xq28’ May Influence Male Sexual Orientation.”International Business Times. Web. 23 Feb. 2015.
Menon, M. G. K. Human Genome Research: Emerging Ethical, Legal, Social, and Economic Issues. New Delhi: Allied, 1999. 65. Print.