498596 tn?1210700259

embryo without Brca1

Hi great women!

I would like to have an opinion from women from a more open minded country.
In England doctors did the first embryo implantation, choosing only embryo with no-modified brca1 in their DNA and in 9 months that couple will have a baby without cancer "sentence" we all know. It does not mean that in this way the risk is zero but it's reduced!
In Italy (religious country....) this news has been a scandal! an outrage!
Would you do that to assure a better life to your children?

a warm hug to all of you!
5 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
513629 tn?1218143953
My husband and I would do this if there was a problem in our genetic dna.  
Helpful - 0
349465 tn?1289081764
I am of the same mindset as Marie3B.  I would not do this myself, or insist my daughter have the test for future Grandchildren.  But, I would not stand in the way of someone wanting to have the test PRIOR to pregnancy.
Helpful - 0
408448 tn?1286883821
I have a daughter with a genetic disorder.  The procedure used in England would have prevented an embryo with Robin's disorder from being chosen to be implanted and born. It can be used for any single gene defect, like cystic fibrosis, from what I heard today. Robin has Neurofibromatosis.  I would not trade Robin for a child without Neurofibromatosis. I would not do this myself, but do not deny others the right to do so if science and the law make it available. You ask good quetions. Thanks for making us think. It helps my chemo brain!!  Marie
Helpful - 0
360216 tn?1218743000
Msjazz, From what I understand the emryo is the mother's.  The father had a family history with grandmother, mother, sister and another relative all battling this genetic form of breast cancer. It does not rule out the possiblity of other genetic disease unless they've tested for other specific genetic diseases and didn't mention it.

Moirapaoletti, I understand the opinion that this is an outrage - it might be perceived as playing g*d or offering false hope, as a cancer diagnosis of another sort is always possible.  I'd venture the guess that many of those who are outraged do not have this gene (or don't know it) and haven't watched loved one after loved one be diagnosed and fight to live.  I personally would probably opt for this testing if this gene ran in my or my husband's families to remove at least one Damocles sword from my child's life, and probably end the passing of this gene from my direct family line.  However, were I to find myself in the position of carrrying a child with this gene, I would certainly continue the pregnancy and welcome the child - and get them tested for the gene when the time was right so they could explore their options.

This is, of course, totally theoretical as I've had a complete hysterectomy, am 56 and the only desire I have regarding children is to see my grandbabies more often!    
Helpful - 0
41502 tn?1223517053
I'm not clear on this. Was the embryo one of the mothers? Did the couple have a family history of cancer? Does this rule out any other possible genetic diseases? I will have to google and see if I can find this.
Helpful - 0
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the Women's Health Community

Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
STDs can't be transmitted by casual contact, like hugging or touching.
Syphilis is an STD that is transmitted by oral, genital and anal sex.
Normal vaginal discharge varies in color, smell, texture and amount.
Bumps in the genital area might be STDs, but are usually not serious.
Chlamydia, an STI, often has no symptoms, but must be treated.
From skin changes to weight loss to unusual bleeding, here are 15 cancer warning signs that women tend to ignore.