Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home PBS Home Programs A-Z TV Schedules Watch Video Donate Shop PBS Search PBS
BLOODLINES
Technology Hits HomeMaking PrecedentMapping the FutureTimelineFact or FictionTalk BackResources
Ask for expert opinions or provide you own in two interactive features, Ask the Experts and Tell Us What You Think.

Tell Us What You Think
A sampling of comments from our viewers and visitors:

I usually never write to people I see on television programs, but I was so moved tonight by Susan Ring that I had to get in touch. Susan Ring is a hero. I so admire her integrity, personal sacrifice and commitment to the children she was carrying. Susan's dedication to ensuring the best possible quality of life for her gestational twins is truly inspirational. Hats off to Susan and her sons for going the extra mile for those babies -- and SHAME on the biological father in particular for walking away so coldly.

------------------------------

Gentlemen, Your show was over the top, should be nominated for and win any and all awards! Kudos! Your show should be on network TV. You expose the extent that companies will go to in order to limit their liability to the workforce. You show how insignificant the workforces of this country are to management. And thank you for exposing some of the most dangerous minds in America today. I thought I was listening to a Stephen King excerpt. It was some of the scariest stuff I've ever heard! Keep up the good work. Barry Bielski

------------------------------

The issue of privacy of medical and genetic information is one that should be taken up immediately by our legislatures and above all by Congress. The most obvious hazard to all of us is the threat to medical insurance, given that it is still run by for-profit corporations, but the third segment of the show reveals the threat to employment as well. Insurance was designed on the basis of reaching the maximum spread of risk and sharing the costs in the whole community. Congress, where are you?

------------------------------

Given the benefits of genetics I think that full disclosure should be encouraged, but this can only happen when discrimination laws are strengthened, as they are for known handicaps like blindness or the wheelchair bound.

------------------------------

I think that there is a lot of fear of the technology being misused, and of individuals abusing the benefits instead of valuing the results. Such in the issue of the baby with 5 grown ups creating and then abandoning their creation as if it were an "oops" that came from the taco stand. The problem there is not the technology, rather the immature selfish adults who placed the order in the firt place. Those individuals should receive serious counseling before engaging in such a search for a child. They should have tried raising a pet first, and if they showed serious commitment, compassion and caring, then could obtain a license to create a child. Unfortunately, those kind of individuals are plentiful and abandon even their own personal children that were created in the old fashion way... so if that is the type of human beings populating the planet, maybe we need not to worry about them procreating, instead should be ordered out of the genetic pool. On the other hand there are plentiful caring adults with horrible disorders, that could benefit from the new biotechnology. We can see some of the benefits of insulin and hormonal replacements to help those who lack those items, and @ some time it was considered experimental also. And often we see signs for BLOOD DRIVES, in that instance we are making the body a public resource, and it is used to save hemophilliacs and people with leukemia, etc. Can it be misused? of course, but we have learned to use it, and respect it. We can learn to respect this new technology. J.M.Meacham

------------------------------

I WAS THE FIRST STROKE PATIENT IN THE WORLD TO HAVE FETAL PIG CELLS INJECTED IN THE DEAD PORTION OF MY BRAIN, AND WOULD DO IT AGAIN IN A MINUTE. I WAS A YOUNG STROKE VICTIM,34, AND WHEN APPROACHED AT THE CHANCE TO DO THIS I JUMPED.

------------------------------

The Bloodlines documentary was excellent. I would like to thank everyone that was involved in it's production for providing such an informative and thought-provoking film. Sincerely, Virginia Minolli

------------------------------

The definition of what is human is obviously an important one because we accord unique privileges and rights to humans. But how exactly do we define 'humans' when the qualities/characteristics that are believed to be uniquely human fall into expansive bell curve distributions? Where is the cutoff at which point a severely disabled person is no longer considered a human and accorded respective human rights? That scenario probably doesn't sit well with most people but given the new genetic technologies by which we can artificially distort what it means to be human shouldn't those kinds of considerations have to be made? By the same logic, is it fair to establish rights based on biological/physiological fact? Normative valuations are not simply the logical inferences of biology, so how will the bridge from 'genetics' to 'rights' be built?

------------------------------

All life pursues pleasure and avoids pain. When logical laws are lacking capitalism tends to harms life, liberty and freedom. Wise administration demands checks and balances. Circumspection is democracy's ally and human nature her greatest foe. How will we choose to balance the forces of pleasure and pain?

------------------------------

I visited the web site after watching the film on PBS. I was amazed that the timeline did not include the notorious and misnomered, "Tuskegee Experiment," even though the sterilization law of Germany was included. That the Nuremberg Code of Research Ethics had no effect on the actions of the United States government is noteworthy enough to include in any historical account of the intersection(s) of science, research, ethics, and laws. Dr. C. Y. Dupree



Our Experts
Mark Rothstein, J.D
Mark Rothstein, J.D.
Director, Institute for Bioethics, Health Policy and the Law, University of Louisville
Susan Ring
Susan Ring
Gestational Surrogate
Bonnie LeRoy, MS, CGC
Bonnie LeRoy, M.S., C.G.C.
Director, Graduate Program in Genetic Counseling,
University of Minnesota
Stuart Newman, Ph.D.
Stuart Newman, Ph.D.
Professor of Biology,
New York Medical College
Patrick J. Coyne, J.D.
Patrick J. Coyne, J.D.
Patent Attorney,
Partner at Finnegan,
Henderson, Farabow,
Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Nanette R. Elster, J.D., M.P.H.
Nanette R. Elster, J.D., M.P.H.
Professor, Institute for Bioethics, Health Policy and Law,
University of Louisville