2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

As medical science advances I think it is critical that we continue to revisit bioethics issues and fine-tune this legislation. Most people would agree that it's negligent not to provide antibiotics to a sick child or insulin to a diabetic child, but I can also imagine a future America in which parents are put on trial for bringing a child into a life of extreme suffering by refusing to follow the advice of genetic counselors. As we accept new treatments and research, will we think that parents are negligent who choose not to terminate a pregnancy in which the child is predicted to suffer a severe genetic disorder?

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context