Boss J A
Department of the University of Rhode Island, Kingston.
J Med Ethics. 1994 Sep;20(3):146-51. doi: 10.1136/jme.20.3.146.
In the past few years considerable attention has been given to a relatively new method of prenatal diagnosis known as chorionic villus sampling (CVS). Because CVS can be performed in the first trimester it is hailed by many as a significant advance over amniocentesis. What has not been as publicized, however, are the disadvantages of CVS and earlier prenatal diagnosis. The emotional costs of CVS in terms of the greater number of both spontaneous and selective abortions following CVS, the use of CVS for sex selection and, because of the greater social acceptability of first trimester abortion, the possibility of increased pressure on women to undergo prenatal diagnosis by health insurance companies, medical professionals and government agencies, all need to be weighed against the advantages of early prenatal diagnosis.
在过去几年里,一种相对较新的产前诊断方法——绒毛取样(CVS)受到了相当多的关注。由于绒毛取样可以在孕早期进行,许多人称赞它是比羊膜穿刺术的一项重大进步。然而,绒毛取样和早期产前诊断的缺点却没有得到同样的宣传。绒毛取样在情感方面的代价包括取样后自然流产和选择性流产数量的增加、将绒毛取样用于性别选择,以及由于孕早期流产在社会上更容易被接受,健康保险公司、医疗专业人员和政府机构可能会加大对女性进行产前诊断的压力,所有这些都需要与早期产前诊断的优势进行权衡。