Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Down's Syndrome | Genetic Diseases

down's syndrome, genetic diseases, mongoloid syndrome, mongols, live and let others live


Photo by Cliff Booth from Pexels

If a person suffering from Down’s syndrome or any such genetic disease should be sterilized or not is really a controversial question hanging before present day geneticists, doctors and the society as a whole.

But, what about those deaths in America and even in some European countries in the late 19th century in the lure of improving future generations of human with the advent of Eugenics.That was perhaps one of the greatest show of human barbarism, that a government can impose as a law on its citizen.

For the moment,taking the case of Down's syndrome or Mongoloid syndrome. As we know that this disease results due to trisomy of 21st chromosome in human beings,i.e.,it is a chromosomal abnormality, which is then characterized by round face, short stature, flaccid muscles, mental deficiency, small ears, protruding tongue, eyelids folded as of Mongols,etc. They are suffering both genetically as well as mentally. The whole idea for detailing this disease is that in one way or the other, these persons are thought to be as a black spot in the scenic beauty of society,especially by intellectuals and others, who have not undergone any such traumatic conditions either with their family members or relatives. If such case could have happened with them, they would have never gone for sterilization or death as one of its treatment. Modern society seems to be just insensible about the acceptance of such people in the mainstream of society as one of its integral part. It's high time to change the mental make-up of society.

I do completely agree with the notion that a disease such as TB etc.which seemed to be incurable in the recent decades, is now completely curable. If all those innocents could have been killed what would have happened with them in present day context?
In the same manner,with the recent advancements in the field of genetics, the researchers and biologists might be able to treat such genetic diseases which mainly involves chromosomal abnormalities with the help of either gene therapy or something else. And, even if the disease can't be cured,then only, sterilization of such persons makes little bit of sense. It is a fact which we are bound to accept any such conclusions is much more difficult to be arrived at. But,surely they must be given all the pleasures of life that might help them in reducing their physical as well as mental agony. If we can manage to live with persons suffering from many dreaded diseases such as AIDS and a lot more. Then why we can't do justice with people suffering from genetic diseases? For instance, both AIDS and genetic diseases are many a times, transferred from one generation to other generation. Then, why such dissimilarity in our mental make-up for the two?

Photo by Cliff Booth from Pexels

In any case,we can't say that these people don't have the right to survive in our society. And,choosing the lives of only the healthiest person, can never make any sense at all. "As for taking life away from another human being, howsoever merciful the motive, many would frown it as coming dangerously close to playing to God." A doctor as well as a scientist of any field concerned have the duty to work for the welfare of society.In other words,their duty is surely to prolong life and not assist in shortening it. It would be a horrendous situation for a patient as well as doctors.

What then?

Who can decide correctly for such a patient?

The act of removing life supports and permitting death can be traumatic enough for some doctors and nurses, may be even abhorrent to their conscience!

Traditionally, society doesn't accept changes easily. No law can push into accepting change. If we can't give life to someone, then WHO ARE WE TO SNATCH OFF THE LIVES of others? But, yes surely we can give our best so as to prolong their lives and inculcate a self respect in them. Isn't it so?

"The transformation of society is an evolutionary process and not a revolutionary one."

Logically, if the collective psyche is ready for a change, there is no need for a law. Myriad shades of opinion exists upon the rights and wrongs of it. Ultimately, it ought to be every individual's right to decide to endure the suffering or end it all? But, for me,I find just nothing wrong in the noblest thought:



Author & Editor


Post a Comment

Please do not enter any spam link in the comment box.