Editor's Note

:) :| :(

Technocare
One thing technology rarely does
is answer society's questions about health care

:) :| :(

We habitually marvel at technology's miracles—the new valves, insulin pumps, and internal defibrillators.   As a society, we demand more research money to fuel the technology machine, hungry for quicker and better solutions. Everyone who has ever been confronted with a serious diagnosis knows the longing for a high-tech cure.

But now we're entering a new era, one marked by fear of that same technology machine.  We wonder whether it's gone too far, whether we've unleashed a power that may overcome our ethical base or may be more advanced than our ability to decide who gets what technology and when.

We've been hearing news that makes us question our assumptions. First it was stories on sheep cloning. More recently it was the front-page articles on the 63-year-old woman who gave birth thanks to the infertility experts at the University of Southern California.

Reaction was mixed.  Some thought it was great. Others puzzled over why anyone over 55 would want 2 a.m. feedings anyway.  A handful of ethicists criticized the woman and the infertility team, charging that it was selfish and thoughtless to set the stage for a 15-year-old to care for a 78-year-old parent.

Some of my friends who usually argue for a woman's right to choose said they felt there should be rules against infertility treatment for women over 50.  Some said that there was something inherently wrong about allowing a senior to conceive.  Leon Kass, a professor of social thought at the University of Chicago, was quoted in the New York Times saying his gravest fear was that the woman's child would “be prevented from really being a child.”

One thing technology rarely does is answer questions. It just keeps raising new ones.  Who should get to choose who has access to new treatments?  Who should pay for the super-treatments?  Who should decide if cloning laboratories should be shut down and the research abandoned?  Is our ability to extend the range of years in which a woman can conceive a benefit to society, or a great risk?

For years we've understood technology's darker side and have wondered how our ethics infrastructure would keep up.  Now, we're beginning to wonder if technology has changed our view of life itself.  How far can we push the limits?  How will we know when we've gone too far?

What do you think? Write me.

Barbara Bronson Gray, MN, RN
Editor in Chief