Private Umbilical Cord Blood Banking: Smart Parenting or Waste of Money?

Bioethics, Children's Health, Parenting
The promise of future cures from banking their child's cord blood allures many parents, but many experts call public banks a better option. Why? Here's an excellent report from ABC News to explain: The choices expectant parents make today go beyond whether to find out the gender of their unborn baby or whether he or she may potentially have a genetic disorder. Today, many parents must decide whether to store their baby's umbilical cord blood. Some are calling it a kind of biological insurance for your child's future. Cord blood provides a rich source of stem cells, primitive cells that have been used for cancer treatment for more than 20 years. Cord blood is marketed for two uses: as a treatment for diseases such as leukemia and sickle cell disease,…
Read More

Cord Blood Banking: Read Between the Ads

Bioethics, Children's Health, Parenting
Do the promises of private cord blood banks live up to reality for parents-to-be? According to the parents I see in practice, it's hard to ignore the ads for cord blood banks, offering a lifetime of protection for their children. And, if you're an expectant mom, there's information coming at you constantly from your doctor's office, magazines, online, and perhaps even your yoga class. Here's an excellent report from ABC News to help you sort out the fluff from the facts: Expectant mom Ursula Lyon, saw an ad during a yoga class. "I'm really early in my pregnancy so I am just getting to the stage where I'm exploring and trying to understand the things I need to prepare for," said Lyon. Some parents-to-be are sold on the advertising that…
Read More

Experts Rebuke Claim that “A Fetus is Not a Person”

Bioethics, Children's Health, Parenting
A philosophy professor at Saint Mary's University (SMU) in Halifax is drawing rebuke from experts in bioethics, medicine, and philosophy for a column in which he advocates abortion based on the notion that “a fetus is not a person.” If pro-abortion advocates can show that the unborn child is not a person, argues Dr. Mark Mercer in an op-ed for the Ottawa Citizen, then a woman's reason for aborting him or her “cannot be outweighed by the fetus's right to life, for, not being a person, the fetus has no such right.” But according to bioethicist Dianne Irving, who ripped into Mercer's column in an essay of her own, Mercer's science is “grossly objectively erroneous” and his concept of “delayed personhood” is “deceptively achieved by means of using academically indefensible…
Read More