Editorial Note.

The blog below is a write up of notes made for a debate – it is therefore deliberately one-sided.  School debates are often controversial.

The blog should be understood in this context: an academic exercise.  The author understands the debate is more complicated and the views below should not be confused with the authors personal views or the views of Stamford Endowed Schools.  (David Tuck – Blog Editor).

‘This house believes people with genetic disorders should be sterilised’

Opposition’s arguments 

The motion refers to the forced sterilisation of people with genetic disorders to prevent them being passed down further hereditary. In theory this would be to stifle the spread of such disorders farther down the bloodline; it’s not like this point cannot be argued, but it is the solution that is proposed that was the main point of clash during the debate.

The first dispute came from the idea of ‘forced’ sterilisation, this implies that anyone that has inherited a genetic disorder that could then be passed down further, should be sterilised regardless of their current situation. This is the solution we would turn to if we were faced by some worldwide epidemic of these genetic diseases; but at the moment it is about stunting the growth and spread of these diseases, and there are both far more practical and humane ways of which this can be achieved.

First off, this aspect of absolute sterilisation does assume the ignorance of the parents possibly carrying a genetic disorder who wish to conceive. The parents are likely to be aware of the risks and obviously it will be a huge decision as to whether they should take them. This decision-making process can be easily helped and ratified through the medium of modern medicine. The NHS for example, has a whole support network dedicated to helping and advising people in this exact situation; this means people have access to professionals who can direct them down the best path regarding their current situation. They could even suggest other means of raising a family, such as adoption and donors.

Healthcare professionals can advise people by using their knowledge on the specific diseases themselves, as well as using modern technology to make this process as safe as possible for the parents. For example, some of the more common genetic disorders such as cystic fibrosis (CF), sickle cell anaemia (SCA), and Tay Sachs disease (TS); are all autosomal recessive. Effectively, this means that even if both parents had the recessive allele that causes these diseases, there is a 50% chance of carrying the disorder, but only a 25% chance of directly inheriting it. These figures make weighing up the risks easier and allows those affected to make a more calculated decision.

Genetic counselling, as mentioned earlier, is a trained specialist who advises parents of the risk of passing a genetic disorder down to their children. This information is gathered through a simple blood test. This furthers the parent’s ability to make their own, free, informed decision on the subject. This advice can be further enhanced by a pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), this is where eggs are removed from the mother’s ovaries and fertilised with the sperm in the laboratory where they are monitored and tested for any genetic mutation that could form a genetic disorder. Once analysed, 2 unaffected embryos will then be re-transferred back to the uterus.

The whole concept of forced sterilisation will be almost impossible to implement regardless, this is due to various worldwide human right laws that label such a process as ‘inhumane’. The world health organisation says, ‘sterilization should only be provided with the full, free and informed consent of the individual’, this documentation is used by the UN when dealing with these issues. Alongside the legal aspect, the whole precedent will be near impossible to actualize into society, it would mean spending £3000 minimum on each sterilisation which only brings with it risks of infection, internal bleeding and other surgical risks that comes with all operations. This is completely unnecessary. This money would be much better used helping people to come to terms with the hazard as well as helping them minimise it. Normal sterilization services are accompanied by long talks with a psychiatrist, as after effects can often include mental health problems such as depression and anxiety after such a permanent change has occurred.

These arguments portray the infeasibility of the motion as well as showing a surplus amount of alternatives to help people rather than cut them off from society.