The DNA Dilemma: A Test That Could Change Your Life

The TIME article, "The DNA Dilemma: A Test That Could Change Your Life" , explains how new technology can now predict diseases a baby could have in the future based on their genome sequence. The ethical question though is should doctors tell parents about certain things that may or may not be harmful to the children in the future? 

In my opinion, doctors should tell the parents, but not everything. For example, it would be a good idea to tell parents any childhood disease that could happen, but any things that could happen at an older age, such as Alzheimer's, shouldn't need to be disclosed so soon. 

Before technology was this advanced, people dealt with not knowing what diseases could come. There is nothing that can be done about some, so waiting to die from it your whole life could be a bad thing because you know you're going to die and have to put a limit on some things in your life. I think it would be a better idea to just let nature take its course and whatever happens happens; it's life.

However, I can understand how a doctor would tell a parent about childhood diseases. The child with the disease would be too young to even understand, so they would go about life normally. The parents would benefit from knowing the information because they could make sure their child has a good young life and maybe even look into cures. Also, not every predicted disease happens, so a child could never even have the disease. 

I also agree that diseases should be told if there is a 100% cure. This doesn't include not doing sports in case of head injury, etc., but a type of vaccine or any other solid method of disease prevention. If a predicted disease has no cure, there is nothing that can be done, so knowing it would make it worse.

In conclusion, not all of the genome sequencing is 100% accurate. Even if someone is at high risk for a disease, it doesn't mean it will happen. I think that parents shoul get a choice to see their child's genome sequencing, but I wouldn't personally. I would rather just let what happens come, and not have to anticipate anything in my future.

Reflections and Resolutions

Reflect: In 2012 I changed A LOT.  I am more involved in my faith now and I help out at church. Also, I don't care about what other people think or say what I should and shouldn't do anymore, I just do what I want. I look back at my last few years and I realized that I have been trying to be like everyone else and do what everyone wants a person to do. I just recently read a Bible verse, I forgot what it was, but it said to not conform to the world, and that verse changed me so much. I am going to keep on working on that and do what is right and what I want to do instead of what society wants. This year has probably changed me the most in so many ways, and I'm proud of myself for it, but there is still room for improvement. I have also realized that so many little annoyances in life don't matter, and I shouldn't focus on them, because they don't even matter in the end! 
My procrastination has gotten really bad, though. Also, my grades are kind of going down. I'm still a good student, but I have noticed that I am trying less in school. I am hoping that I will change and I will become more motivated.
Resolve: Normally, I don't do New Years resolutions since I don't keep them. In fact, most of the time no one keeps them. However, I decided to make some, but really I always have goals throughout the year, especially at the beginning of the school year instead of the New Year. My goals are that I want to procrastinate less. I also want to get a job and finish the school year with straight A's each quarter. 

The Ethics Of Social Media After Death

After we die, someone is going to have to do something with any of our social medias accounts and blogs. But, what should be done about it and who has the rights to decide what to do? 
Many people have different opinions, but here are mine:
I think that if the deceased person wants something done, then whoever is taking care of their blog should do whatever that person would have wanted. If they didn't mention it, however, I think their family has a right to decide what to do. They can have the choice of making their account public, deleting it, or archiving it and saving it to a computer.

"The most prominent place this issue has come up, not surprisingly, is Facebook. For some time now, it has offered an option to request that a profile be switched to “memorial” mode when an individual dies."-Cyberspace When You're Dead, NY Times.
I agree with the idea of having different options on what to do. The memorial mode is a very good idea, and it should be used for all social media. It gives an option, so nothing is forced, but it gives that option of choosing whether or not the deceased should have a public profile.

"'I only ever knew him over Twitter,' Sarah Cashmore , a graduate student in Toronto, told me. She shared his enthusiasm for design and technology and learned of his death from Twitter contacts. 'I was actually devastated,' she says."-Cyberspace When You're Dead, NY Times. People now days meet people through the internet, and make good friendships, like in the case of Sarah. This is important because when someone dies, the only way that friend, who could live very far away from the person who died, can grieve and remember them. So, that is another reason to have the option to save the content a deceased person has posted: so long-distance friends can look back and see their friends account/blog.