Parenting Children Using Genetic Tests
by Dr. Hsien-Hsien Lei
Posted January 11, 2009 in DNA Testing
Trolls have been around these here parts. They’re upset because I wrote disparaging remarks about a particular company marketing DNA tests for detecting a child’s “innate talent.” But contrary to their accusations that I deny the genetic basis of behavior, predisposition, and temperament, I actually believe that many, if not almost all, human traits are influenced by genetic make-up.
My problem with genetic testing companies that target parents seeking to hothouse their children is that the biological mechanism of the few behavioral genes that have been identified are poorly understood. In addition, we have limited data on how these genes interact with other genes and with environmental exposures. Parents who think they will raise the next Bill Gates or Mozart by purchasing a test that focuses on a limited panel of genotypes are sadly deluded.
Last year I shared a Steven Pinker quote from Curious Minds: How a Child Becomes a Scientist that I think about all the time when parenting my own children:
With constitutional factors (genes and chance) being important but invisible, people tend to blur cause and effect in thinking back on supposedly formative childhood vignettes. …Rather than childhood experiences causing us to be who we are, who we are causes our childhood experiences.
This Sunday’s New York Times features My Genome, My Self - Steven Pinker Gets to the Bottom of his own Genetic Code in which Dr. Pinker points out that no matter how parents contrive to create the perfect environment for their children, when the children become adults, they will most likely gravitate towards experiences that suit their innate genetic tendencies. Would this be an argument for or against genetic testing in childhood?
A common finding is that the effects of being brought up in a given family are sometimes detectable in childhood, but that they tend to peter out by the time the child has grown up. That is, the reach of the genes appears to get stronger as we age, not weaker. Perhaps our genes affect our environments, which in turn affect ourselves. Young children are at the mercy of parents and have to adapt to a world that is not of their choosing. As they get older, however, they can gravitate to the microenvironments that best suit their natures.
Of course every parents has the right, and the power, to subject their children to genetic testing. In some cases, these tests may predict future debilitating diseases. And with these results, parents can help children live healthier lives with preventive lifestyle changes. Such is the power of genetic testing.
When it comes to genetic testing for academic, musical, or athletic talent, however, the results are far more ambiguous. Not only will the child be directly impacted by the results, the rest of the family will be impacted as well. Say parents scrimped and saved to get their child tested so they can make sure she becomes a success in life and help guarantee the family’s financial security. If the cost of the test plus other enrichment courses suggested by the test results impinge on the family’s overall well-being and lifestyle, it’s possible the investment may not be worth it. Or what if it turns out the child has a very average genetic profile? Would the parents be less likely to devote any time or effort into raising her?
Regardless, a child who supposedly has genes for high IQ may very well also have the trollism gene that relegates him to being a low-EQ jerk. Hardly a marker of future success. And as Peggy pointed out, genetic testing companies that target parents most likely will not include negative genes in any report. Nobody wants to be the bearer of bad news. Unless you’re a troll, that is.

Related Posts:
Storing and Testing Children’s DNA...
Eye on DNA Links for 10 July 2007...
Parents Feel Guilty Over Giving Children Bad Genes...
Types of Genetic Tests...
Collecting DNA from Innocent Children to Prevent Crime...
Family History of Disease Scares Parents More Than Genetic Test Results...
Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD): A Discussion...
Please note that comments left using the form below will be publicly displayed. If you'd like to correspond with me privately, please email me at hsien@eyeondna.com.
If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it's probably in moderation. I will approve it as soon as I can! Thanks for your patience.
2 Comments »
Search Eye on DNA
- Michael Jackson May Have Had Genetic Lung Disease Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency
- Twin DNA Foil Investigators Again
- Regulatin’ Genes Video
- Yay or Nay for Genetic Testing?
- American Clinical Laboratory Association Tips for Consumers of Genetic Tests
- Navigenics Introduces Physician Portal and Annual Insight Service
- Eye on DNA Interview: Dr. Tzung-Fu Hsieh of RedTracer DNA Test for the Red Hair Gene, MC1R
- Books About DNA: The Crime of Reason by Robert B. Laughlin
- What does DNA mean to you?
- Genetically Modified Organisms Bring in the Cash
MOST POPULAR
- DNA Toys: Ben 10 and Digimon Digivice
- 100 Facts About DNA
- Genetically Modified Organisms Bring in the Cash
- What does DNA mean to you?
- Books About DNA: The Crime of Reason by Robert B. Laughlin
- Eye on DNA Interview: Dr. Tzung-Fu Hsieh of RedTracer DNA Test for the Red Hair Gene, MC1R
- Parenting Children Using Genetic Tests
- Navigenics Introduces Physician Portal and Annual Insight Service
- American Clinical Laboratory Association Tips for Consumers of Genetic Tests
- Yay or Nay for Genetic Testing?
- Michael Jackson May Have Had Genetic Lung Disease Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency
07/02/2009 01:44 pm
2 Comments - Is the Pink or Blue early baby gender DNA test accurate?
05/27/2009 08:25 am
78 Comments - New Line Genetics and SellMyDNA.com Offer $5,000 for Your DNA
05/06/2009 03:56 am
33 Comments - Boston Celebrities Donate DNA for Genographic Project
05/05/2009 08:07 am
6 Comments - Twin DNA Foil Investigators Again
05/02/2009 11:32 pm
3 Comments - Business of DNA
- DNA @ Google Answers
- DNA and Disease
- DNA and Genealogy
- DNA and the Law
- DNA Around the World
- DNA Fun
- DNA in General
- DNA Inventions and Gadgets
- DNA Lab Talk
- DNA Podcasts and Videos
- DNA Quotes and Excerpts
- DNA Testing
- Gene Therapy
- Genetic Engineering
- Genetically Modified Foods and Organisms
- Jobs Involving DNA
- Personalities with DNA
- Polls About DNA
RECENT POSTS
RECENT COMMENTS
CATEGORIES
ARCHIVE
- June 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
RANDOMIZED BLOGROLL
- Gene Sherpa
- nodalpoint.org
- Epigenetics News
- Ideas for Women
- The Issue
- The Inoculated Mind
- Tales of CFS
- Sandwalk
- Genome Technology Online
- Let’s Get Personal
| We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here. |




I believe there is a greater tendency to test your child or children if you have one or two. Parents of only children often feel they have one chance to get it right, and the availability of, for example, genetic testing for athletic leanings, may be too hard for many parents to resist. The same could be said of overly competitive parents–huge numbers in today’s society.
I write about the intense pressure that can occur in smaller families: http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/singletons
Thanks for your comment, Susan. Your blog looks very interesting! I hadn’t thought of the pressure to get it right that comes with only having one child.