> Choosing not to treat someone because "they may contribute to society", even if they are suffering and wish not to suffer from their treatable disorder, is al

> Choosing not to treat someone because "they may contribute to society", even if they are suffering and wish not to suffer from their treatable disorder, is always unethical imho. I agree - it's absolute misery on the individual level and relieving that pain is a good thing. The real ethical debate comes when we have the ability to eliminate these conditions through germ-line edits. A rogue doctor in China already did this by making the CCR5 gene non-functional in embryos and the children were born. The doctor went to prison, and the scientific community roundly condemned his work, but this isn't going away. "Fixing" major genetic diseases in the embryo is possible, and it's a pretty slippery slope once we start down that path.