Institute of Science and Ethics (IWE), University of Bonn, Bonner Talweg 57, 53113 Bonn, Germany.
Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Ethics in the Neurosciences (INM-8), Forschungszentrum Jülich, 52425 Jülich, Germany.
J Perinat Med. 2021 May 24;49(8):949-952. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2021-0194. Print 2021 Oct 26.
Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been available for almost 10 years. In many countries the test attracted considerable criticism from the start. While most critical comments in this context deal with the (alleged) problem of eugenic selection, I will concentrate on a somewhat broader issue.
I will argue that NIPT clearly has the potential to increase reproductive autonomy and benefit expectant parents. However, NIPT can also put people in a situation that is morally overwhelming for them and from which there is no easy way out. In this sense, such tests can have a dilemma-generating effect.
I will conclude that this can be adequately described by the term "moral ambivalence".
非侵入性产前检测（NIPT）已经问世近 10 年。在许多国家，该检测从一开始就引起了相当多的批评。虽然大多数批评意见都是针对（所谓的）优生选择问题，但我将集中讨论一个稍广泛的问题。
我认为，NIPT 显然有可能增加生殖自主权并使准父母受益。然而，NIPT 也可能使人们陷入一种对他们来说难以承受的道德困境，而没有简单的出路。从这个意义上说，此类检测可能会产生产生困境的效果。
我将得出结论，用“道德矛盾”这个术语可以充分描述这一情况。
