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.

(4 comments)

RSS feed

4 Comments

Comment by Susan Newman, Ph.D.

2009-01-12 21:32:16

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

Reply to this comment

Comment by Hsien-Hsien Lei, PhD

2009-01-12 22:40:08

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.

Reply to this comment

Comment by gg gardner

2009-05-18 02:09:47

I would like to know what genetics might have had to do with this story. I have two adult daughters. They both sing as well as anyone you have seen on tv or cd’s I don’t sing but I write real well. My father, their grandfather sang and wrote. Does this mean that my want to sing, and my talent for writing and my fathers being able to sing and write, could that be why they can sing so dam— well?

(Comments wont nest below this level)

Reply here

 

 

 

Pingback by Genetics = Real Science

2009-11-14 23:38:06

[...] That’s the kind of argument some shady companies are making about direct-to-consumer genetic testing. It reminds me of the ruckus earlier this year over companies that offer genetic testing to parents who’re interested in having their children tested for athletic prowess and other abilities. [...]

Reply to this comment

 

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.