Screening embryos isn't doing everything possible — it's moral blackmail
Genetic screening can lower disease risk, but the statistics are routinely oversold, and the practice may deepen social inequality. Parents should aim for "good enough" rather than optimal, and stay wary of the moral blackmail commercial firms trade on.
The video won't play here. Listen to the audio instead:
The argument · tap a timestamp to hear it
"Doing everything possible" isn't love, it's moral blackmail
A listener's letter asking "shouldn't I do everything I possibly can?" lands directly on the trap of moral optimization that Sagal herself was once caught in. She argues that this way of thinking loads parents with guilt and shame — especially when the social judgment starts before the child is even born, as if you were already a bad parent. It sets the emotional register for everything that follows.
— Sigal SamuelPolygenic screening measures correlation, not causation
Distinguish PGT-A from polygenic testing. The first is simple and has a long history: it screens for Down syndrome and can identify sex. The second is complex, reaching for traits shaped by thousands of genes — depression, IQ. Polygenic testing rests on correlation rather than causation, the interactions with environment are unknown, and many researchers think its predictive power is overstated.
— Sigal Samuel"Risk reduced by 12%" does not mean you won't get sick
"Risk reduced by 12%" sounds appealing, but disease is a continuum, not a switch. Lowering risk may only delay onset or soften severity rather than prevent anything. A reduction in diabetes risk, for instance, might mean moving from diabetes to prediabetes, or getting it a few years later. Consumers easily read this as a guarantee of health.
— Sigal SamuelScreen out the anxiety genes and the creativity may go too
Anxiety and obsessive traits bring real suffering, but they are also bound up with creativity and focus. Both Sagal and Noam say that even with a magic wand, they would not erase these traits in themselves. Screening out the genes for "mental illness" may therefore mean losing latent advantages at the same time, which makes the decision harder, not easier.
— Sigal SamuelOne gene does more than one job — screen here, move something there
The case for screening runs into a scientific problem: pleiotropy means a single gene affects multiple traits, and our understanding of those effects is thin. Screen broadly against depression-linked genes and you may alter other traits without meaning to. The population-level consequences are unknown, and that is a serious reason to be against screening.
— Sigal SamuelOnce the price falls, it's the parents who don't screen who are coerced
Polygenic testing is expensive today — Orchid charges $2,500 per embryo, so testing 10 embryos runs to $25,000. That points toward the rich screening for smarter, healthier offspring and a widening class gap. More worrying still: once the price falls and the practice becomes common, parents who don't screen may be leaving their child at a disadvantage. That is coercion by another name.
— Sigal SamuelA child who was selected for may feel like a disappointment
If parents select for sex, the child may grow up to discover they are transgender, and feel that the money their parents spent choosing a sex is a form of pressure — may even feel they are a "disappointment." Knowing you were selected can carry a new psychological weight, and it adds another layer of complication to the parent-child relationship.
— Sigal SamuelThe standard for a good parent is good enough, not optimal
Drawing on Nobel laureate Herbert Simon's concept of satisficing, Sagal suggests parents choose "good enough" over optimal. Preventing a fatal disease like Tay-Sachs is reasonable; chasing "high IQ, blue eyes" goes too far. It gives ethical decisions a framework you can actually use.
— Sigal SamuelIn their own words · checked verbatim
Don't I have to do everything in my power?
Sigal Samuel4:30
It's not like a bill of perfect health.
Sigal Samuel12:13
I wouldn't just be like, let's wave a magic wand and get rid of it.
Sigal Samuel15:00
They might feel like, I extra feel like a disappointment.
Sigal Samuel20:00
What if you could have stopped it? But chose not to.
Sigal Samuel23:09
Figures
| Polygenic testing cost | $2,500 per embryo | 18:19 |
Glossary
- PGT-A
- Preimplantation genetic screening for abnormal chromosome counts, such as Down syndrome; it can also identify sex.
- polygenic testing
- Assessment of complex traits shaped by many genes — depression, IQ — with limited predictive power.
- pleiotropy
- One gene affects multiple traits, so screening for one thing can produce unknown knock-on effects.
- satisficing
- A decision strategy of choosing "good enough" rather than optimal, proposed by Herbert Simon.
How to listen
Prospective parents weighing IVF or embryo screening, plus people in tech and policy who care about reproductive ethics and the social consequences of genetic technology.
You can skip the ads, but the substance starts at 4:30 and the whole thing is worth hearing.