Opinions www.Daily49er.com
OpedD49er@gmail.com
5 Thursday, July 18, 2013
Three-parent IVF is a safe alternative for parents with disease The United Kingdom may soon become the first country to support the creation of a baby using DNA from three different people. Known as the three-parent in-vitro fertilization (IVF) method, the revolutionary new process involves the mother and father of a fetus along with a female egg donor. Though it is not widely known, three-parent IVF would allow mothers with defective mitochondria the opportunity to contribute their DNA to their child along with the use of a female egg donor. Mitochondria, which are responsible for providing our bodies with oxygen and energy, are passed from mother to fetus, so mothers who have been diagnosed with mitochondrial diseases risk the possibility of passing unhealthy mitochondria to their children. According to an article from BBC News, defective mitochondria can result in lack of energy, possible blindness, heart failure, muscle weakness and ultimately, death. Contrary to what some may think, in-vitro fertilization procedures are not new. According to an article from cancer charity
Livestrong, approximately 4,000 to 5,000 births per year come from artificial insemination. In 2012, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology announced that approximately five million children have been born through procedures like IVF. Procedures like three-parent IVF allow couples with genetic diseases to start healthy families. Before procedures like three-parent IVF, couples who wanted to start a fameiana ily had to turn to egg or sperm donation, with one parent’s DNA going unused. Three-parent IVF would use the mother’s nucleus and the donor’s mitochondria to conceive a child. People against this procedure argue that it could be potentially harmful to the fetus and that it is a form of genetic modification, which could be passed down through generations. Some opponents of the procedure also worry about how DNA from three different people may affect the child and the donor.
L
The procedure raises other questions as well. Concerns arise over when the parents should tell the child how they were conceived. Also, should the egg donor who was involved in the procedure be a part of the child’s life? Opponents raise the question of whether this procedure is absolutely necessary, given other options such as adoption and egg donation without the need of three different genetic makeups. Like any new scientific wanson invention, significant amounts of research and testing would need to assure safety before permanently putting a procedure like this into effect. If it is approved in the future, this procedure could create a great opportunity for couples with genetic diseases to have children using both of their DNA. As long as the first children conceived using this new method are closely monitored by scientists, the risks of mitochondrial defects would be minimized while allowing the DNA of the mother to be used in the reproduction
S
process. While three people would be involved in the procreation process, it would not mean the child has three parents. The parents of the child would be those who raise and care for the child: in this case, the husband and wife. Just because a donor is involved in the procedure does not mean the donor would need to be involved in the child’s life. Like the many women who donate their eggs to other women who are incapable of having children, donors do not need to become a second mother. Although this method of procreation may not seem natural, three-parent IVF will benefit women with genetic mitochondrial diseases who want to have children. It will also prove that with science, there is a safe way to use the DNA of two women in the reproductive process to avoid passing along any disease to the child. Leiana Swanson is a senior kinesiology major and a contributing writer at the Daily 49er.
Hunger strike in Guantanamo Bay offers hope for future reforms While many Americans were watching the George Zimmerman trial last week, actor and hip-hop recording artist Yasiin Bey shocked the world by allowing himself to be force-fed on video. Formerly known as Mos Def, Bey agreed to work with The Guardian to show the public what prisoners in Guantanamo Bay face if they choose to engage in a hunger strike. In addition to showing how incredibly painful and tortuous the force-feeding process is for prisoners, Bey helped publicize the hunger strike that is taking place at the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center in Cuba. Though the number of people engaged in the hunger strike is less than half of the center’s total prisoners, the act of solidarity should help shed light on the harsh living conditions being promoted at the detention center. According to The New York Times, more than 80 Guantanamo Bay prisoners are engaged in a hunger strike for reasons including “offensive” military searches and “a growing despair that
they would never go home.” Although the process of force-feeding can be extremely painful, the decision among prisoners to engage in a hunger strike to protest the center’s conditions is wise. It’s about time the world knows what kind of inhumane acts go on within the prison. In the last decade, many people have heard about Guantanamo Bay and its notorious past. To its liking or hane not, Guantanamo Bay has come to be synonymous with torture and advanced interrogation techniques of its prisoners. According to a 2005 article from TIME, interrogation procedures within Guantanamo Bay included using a wet towel on prisoners to simulate suffocation. An article from National Public Radio detailed prisoners having to perform humiliating sexual acts while at Guantanamo Bay as well. It is clear that many highly questionable acts have taken place within Guantanamo Bay’s walls
S
in the last decade. By engaging in a hunger strike, prisoners are making public to the world what is truly going on within the prison. As shown in the Bey video, the act of force-feeding can easily be considered a tortuous act. Under the supervision of several doctors, Bey made public the process that includes inserting a long, narrow tube into a nasal cavity to ewell prisoner’s deliver food. Recently, three prisoners requested to a federal judge that she block the policy of force-feeding, according to an article from The Washington Post. Not surprisingly, the federal judge denied the request. “There is nothing so shocking or inhumane in the treatment of petitioners — which they can avoid at will — to raise a constitutional concern that might otherwise necessitate review,” U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer wrote.
N
GOT AN OPINION? LET US KNOW OPEDD49ER@GMAIL.COM
Although the policy of force-feeding will likely continue in the near future, the need for Americans to publicly discuss the harsh conditions in Guantanamo Bay is now. As many know, Guantanamo Bay harbors suspected terrorists from around the globe. Regardless of the prisoner’s past actions or political views, their rights should be respected and honored by the U.S. justice system. After being interrogated with non-tortuous methods, prisoners should be formally charged with a crime. Throwing prisoners in cells for more than a decade without a formal charge or hope of a trial is egregious. If prisoners have terrorist affiliations or intentions to hurt America, charge them with a crime. If they don’t, let them go. Treating prisoners inhumanely only serves to worsen America’s world image. The time to treat prisoners fairly and humanely is now. Shane Newell is a junior journalism major and the opinions editor at the Daily 49er.