Beginning-of-Life in Halakha #1: Genetic Testing and Disclosing Genetic Illnesses

אמר רבא השתא דאמרת אחיות מחזקות לא ישא אדם אשה לא ממשפחת נכפין ולא ממשפחת מצורעים והוא דאתחזק תלתא זימני

Rava said: Now that you have said that sisters establish a presumption, a man should not marry a woman from a family of epileptics or from a family of lepers, as these diseases might be hereditary. The Gemara adds: And this applies only if it was established three times, i.e., three members of the family are afflicted with the disease.

(ז) לֹא יִשָּׂא אָדָם אִשָּׁה לֹא מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת מְצֹרָעִין וְלֹא מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת נִכְפִּין, וְהוּא שֶׁהֻחְזַק שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים שֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ בְּנֵיהֶם לִידֵי כָּךְ:

(7) A man shouldn't marry a women from a leporous family nor from a nekafim. If a family has three instances the next children will have the presumption of being this way.

From the Dor Yesharim Website

CONFIDENTIALITY

The life altering success of the Dor Yeshorim program is due to the absolute confidentiality inherent within the system. Everyone wants the very best for their children’s future. If Dor Yeshorim was to disclose testing results, those who are not carriers would certainly feel relief. But what about the boys and girls who turn out to be carrying a genetic disease? What does one do with that knowledge? Announce to the public “I am a carrier”?? Share the information with the shadchan and jeopardize shidduchim before they even begin?

Even the most highly educated individuals have difficulty using intellect to dominate the emotions of knowing that he or she, or a potential mate carries a genetic disease. To avoid any stigmatization, and based on the dictates of numerous Torah luminaries, Dor Yeshorim’s infrastructure was therefore created with inherent confidentiality. This is no way negates the intelligence of the general public or their ability to comprehend and assess results.

Rav Moshe Feinstein

It is advisable for one preparing to be married, to have himself tested. It is also proper to publicize the fact, via newspapers and other media, that such a test is available. It is clear and certain that absolute secrecy must be maintained to prevent anyone from learning the result of such a test performed on another. The physician must not reveal these to anyone... these tests must be performed in private, and, consequently, it is not proper to schedule these test in large groups as, for example, in Yeshivas, schools, or other similar situations (46).

The Problem With Dor Yeshorim

Genetics activist Sarah Dworcan says singles tested by the Dor Yeshorim organization are not "safely assured."

By Sarah Dworcan for COLlive

We are taught that the truth always prevails. But there are times when one cannot stand by and wait for the truth to be uncovered. When lives are at stake, every moment matters, and if you know something that can save a life and yet you remain silent, you too are culpable.

The Dor Yeshorim article posted on COLlive.com on Thursday, December 1st, outraged me.

Not because my child was born with an extremely rare but known Ashkenazic genetic disease, after we had both been tested by Dor Yeshorim before marriage and told we were "compatible."

It is because the lies and manipulation continue to fester.

This year alone, 25,000 young frum boys and girls will be tested by Dor Yeshorim and will think, as we did, that their genetic prospects are safely assured.

In our communities, Dor Yeshorim is painted as The Angel. This is not only misleading; it is dangerous.

The article simply fails to mention the most important fact — Dor Yeshorim only tests for 7 diseases. There are a total of 39 life-threatening Ashkenazic diseases, made up of hundreds of mutations.

In addition to the limited diseases, Dor Yeshorim only account for one known mutation of each disease that they actually test for. Who makes the decision of what disease is deemed "serious" enough to warrant being tested for? Is being at-risk for metabolic crisis, coma and death each moment of everyday considered serious enough? Apparently, not.

Also not mentioned is the "second panel" issue. The second panel only tests for another 7 diseases, which amounts to a total of 14 diseases. That is 14 out of 39. This second panel needs to be personally requested and an additional fee paid for.

Besides the fact that the concept of limited panels in the genetic world is outdated, why does a second panel even exist? If those diseases are important, surely it should all be on one test? And why only for an additional seven diseases? What about the other twenty-three?

Finally, Dor Yeshorim is NOT a medical organization, despite what their picture and tagline would have you believe.

How does this continue when their choices affect lives? Do these lives not matter? Are they not, in their words, "ensuring healthy children for Klal Yisroel”?

In truth, I believe it is better not to do genetic testing than to be tested through Dor Yeshorim. That way, at least people do not have a false sense of security that they have been "comprehensively genetically tested."

That is why my husband Yossi Dworcan and I founded Jnetic, an initiative to raise awareness regarding the systems used in screening for genetic disorders prevalent in the Jewish community.

We are working to get the facts straight and, as a community, take a stand. All known life-threatening diseases and mutations should be tested for.

* Upon request of the patient, as with any other personal medical information, results should be available and explained by a genetic counselor.

* The stigma and fear factor associated with carrier status should be broken. The answer to this is: Education, education, education. There is no shame in being a carrier; every person in the world is a carrier for at least 5 different mutations. We, as Jews, simply have a higher chance of being carriers for the same diseases because of our likely common lineage.

* When both parties are carriers, there are ways to have healthy children to the best of science's ability. These options are Halachically and medically sound and should be explained to the community.

* "Compatible" and "not compatible" are not medical terms, and we should not allow them to label us as such. Breaking up a shidduch (match) because both parties are carriers for a genetic mutation is something that we, as individuals, should be able to make an informed and educated decision about with the help of medical professionals. Making this decision for others is called playing G-d.

* Cost is not a factor. Check out Jscreen. More comprehensive tests are available at a cheaper rate than that of Dor Yeshorim’s, plus they include genetic counseling.

* MOST importantly: We all have the right and obligation to be informed and educated.

I don't expect you take my word for it. I encourage you to reach out to a medical professional who specializes in genetics and specifically how it relates to the Jewish community. If you would like a reference to one, please feel free to reach out to us at [email protected].

(טז) לֹא־תֵלֵ֤ךְ רָכִיל֙ בְּעַמֶּ֔יךָ לֹ֥א תַעֲמֹ֖ד עַל־דַּ֣ם רֵעֶ֑ךָ אֲנִ֖י ה'

(16) Do not deal basely with your countrymen. Do not profit by the blood of your fellow: I am the LORD.

(א) הַמְרַגֵּל בַּחֲבֵרוֹ עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט טז) "לֹא תֵלֵךְ רָכִיל בְּעַמֶּיךָ". וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לוֹקִין עַל דָּבָר זֶה עָוֹן גָּדוֹל הוּא וְגוֹרֵם לַהֲרֹג נְפָשׁוֹת רַבּוֹת מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. לְכָךְ נִסְמָךְ לוֹ (ויקרא יט טז) "וְלֹא תַעֲמֹד עַל דַּם רֵעֶךָ". צֵא וּלְמַד מָה אֵרַע לְדוֹאֵג הָאֲדֹמִי:

(1) He who goes about as a spy against his fellow man trespasses a negative commandment; for it is said: Thou shalt not go about as a tale-bearer, among thy people, (Lev. 19. 16); and although this offence is not punishable with stripes, it is still a great sin, and may cause the destruction of a great many souls of Israel; and therefore it is followed immediately by the commandment: Neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour. The evil consequences of the conduct of Doeg, the Edomite, may furnish an important lesson on slander.

אמר ליה אביי לרב דימי האי קרא במערבא במאי מוקמיתו ליה (משלי כה, ח) אל תצא לריב מהר פן מה תעשה באחריתה בהכלים אותך רעך ריבך ריב את רעך וסוד אחר אל תגל בשעה שאמר לו הקב"ה ליחזקאל (יחזקאל טז, ג) לך אמור להם לישראל אביך האמורי ואמך חתית אמרה רוח פסקונית לפני הקב"ה רבש"ע אם יבואו אברהם ושרה ויעמדו לפניך אתה אומר להם ומכלים אותם ריבך ריב את רעך וסוד אחר אל תגל

§ Abaye said to Rav Dimi, who descended to Babylonia from Eretz Yisrael: How do you explain this verse in the West, Eretz Yisrael: “Do not proceed hastily to litigation, lest you know not what to do in the end of it, when your neighbor has put you to shame. Debate your cause with your neighbor, and do not reveal the secret of another” (Proverbs 25:8–9)? Rav Dimi explained as follows: At the time that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Ezekiel: Go say to Israel: “Your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite” (Ezekiel 16:3), the spirit Paskonit, which is another name for the angel Gabriel, said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, were the patriarch Abraham and the matriarch Sarah to come now and stand before You, would you speak to them in such a manner and put them to shame? Is it not stated: “Debate your cause with your neighbor, and do not reveal the secret of another”?

(ויקרא א, א) ויקרא אל משה וידבר למה הקדים קריאה לדיבור לימדה תורה דרך ארץ שלא יאמר אדם דבר לחבירו אלא א"כ קורהו מסייע ליה לרבי חנינא דאמר רבי חנינא לא יאמר אדם דבר לחבירו אלא אם כן קורהו לאמר אמר ר' (מוסיא בר בריה דרבי מסיא משמיה דר' מוסיא) רבה מניין לאומר דבר לחבירו שהוא בבל יאמר עד שיאמר לו לך אמור שנאמר (ויקרא א, א) וידבר ה' אליו מאהל מועד לאמר

The verse says: “And He called unto Moses, and the Lord spoke unto him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying” (Leviticus 1:1). Why does the verse mention calling before speaking, and God did not speak to him at the outset? The Torah is teaching etiquette: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. This supports the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina, as Rabbi Ḥanina said: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. With regard to the term concluding the verse: “Saying,” Rabbi Musya, grandson of Rabbi Masya, said in the name of Rabbi Musya the Great: From where is it derived with regard to one who tells another some matter, that it is incumbent upon the latter not to say it to others until the former explicitly says to him: Go and tell others? As it is stated: “And the Lord spoke to him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying [lemor].” Lemor is a contraction of lo emor, meaning: Do not say. One must be given permission before transmitting information.

שו"ת ציץ אליעזר חלק יג סימן קד

וחוץ מזה הא ישנו על כך משום שבועת - הרופאים ומכיון שנשבע הרי יש בזה שוב איסור תורה משום עבירה על השבועה.

Responsa Tzitz Eliezer 13:104

Aside from this, one violates for this the physician's oath. Since one has sworn, one thereby violates the biblical violation against violating an oath.

גמ׳ ת"ר מניין לרודף אחר חבירו להרגו שניתן להצילו בנפשו ת"ל (ויקרא יט, טז) לא תעמוד על דם רעך והא להכי הוא דאתא האי מיבעי ליה לכדתניא מניין לרואה את חבירו שהוא טובע בנהר או חיה גוררתו או לסטין באין עליו שהוא חייב להצילו ת"ל לא תעמוד על דם רעך אין ה"נ

GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that with regard to one who pursues another in order to kill him, the pursued party may be saved at the cost of the pursuer’s life? The verse states: “You shall not stand idly by the blood of another” (Leviticus 19:16); rather, you must save him from death. The Gemara asks: But does this verse really come to teach us this? This verse is required for that which is taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that one who sees another drowning in a river, or being dragged away by a wild animal, or being attacked by bandits [listin], is obligated to save him? The Torah states: “You shall not stand idly by the blood of another.” The Gemara answers: Yes, it is indeed so that this verse relates to the obligation to save one whose life is in danger.

(יד) [יד] "ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול"-- לפני סומא בדבר. בא אמר לך "בת איש פלוני מה היא לכהונה?" אל תאמר לו כשרה והיא אינה אלא פסולה. היה נוטל ממך עצה אל תתן לו עצה שאינה הוגנת לו. אל תאמר לו "צא בהשכמה" שיקפחוהו לסטים, "צא בצהרים" בשביל שישתרב, אל תאמר לו "מכור את שדך וקח לך חמור" ואת עוקף עליו ונוטלה הימנו. שמא תאמר "עצה טובה אני נותן לו!" והרי הדבר מסור ללב שנאמר "ויראת מאלקיך אני ה' ".

(14) 14) "and before the blind man do not place a stumbling-block.": before one who is "blind" in a certain matter. If he asks you: "Is that man's daughter fit for (marriage into) the priesthood? Do not tell him that she is kasher if she is not. If he asks you for advice, do not give him advice that is unfit for him. Do not say to him "Leave early in the morning," so that robbers should assault him. "Leave in the afternoon," so that he fall victim to the heat. Do not say to him "Sell your field and buy an ass," and you seek occasion against him and take it from him. Lest you say "But I gave him good advice!" — these things are "known to the heart," viz.: "And you shall fear your G d; I am the L rd."

הלכות רכילות, חפץ חיים

כלל ט', סעיף א'

לעיל בהלכות לשון הרע כלל י' בארנו באיזה אופן מותר לספר לשון הרע אם אחד התנהג שלא כהוגן בענינים שבין אדם לחברו, והמספר מתכווין לתועלת. וכעת נבאר באיזה אופן מותר לספר רכיל מלכתחילה, אם המספר מתכווין בסיפורו לסלק את הנזקים.
אם אחד רואה שחברו רוצה לעשות שותפות עם אחד, ומשער שעל ידי זה יסובב לחברו נזק, צריך לומר לו כדי להצילו מן הנזק.

הלכות רכילות, כלל ט', סעיף ב'

ואלו התנאים:
א. יזהר מאוד שלא יחליט מיד שיסובב לחברו רעה, רק יתבונן קודם היטב אם באמת ייצא רעה לחברו.
ב. שלא יגדיל את הרעה יותר ממה שהיא.


ג. שיכוון רק לתועלת לסלק הנזקין, ולא מצד שנאה על ההוא שרוצה לעשות שותפות.

ד. אם הוא יכול לסובב את התועלת בלא צורך לרכל עליו, אסור לספר.

Laws of Talebearing, Chafetz Chaim

9:1

Earlier, in the laws of lashon hara, principle 10, we explained in what scenario one may speak lashon hara if one acts inappropriately regarding interpersonal matters, and the speaker intends for constructive purposes. Now we will explain in what situation one may talebear in the first place, if the speaker intends thereby to avoid damage.

If one sees a friend who wishes to partner with another, and anticipates that through this damage will be caused to his friend, he must say something to him, in order to save him from the damage.

Laws of Talebearing 9:2

And these are the conditions:

1. He must be careful not to decide immediately that the matter will be bad for his friend; instead, he should first ponder whether it will truly come out badly for his friend.

2. He must not exaggerate the evil more than it is.

3. He must intend only for the removal of that damage, not due to hatred against the one who desires a partnership.

4. If he can achieve the desired result without talebearing at all, it is forbidden to tell.

R. Bleich, Tradition 34:1, pg. 79

The first of those problems is whether the carrier state, when ascertained, must be disclosed to a prospective marriage partner. An extreme case-and one in which the answer is obvious-is identification of an individual as a carrier of the gene responsible for Huntington's disease. The gene is dominant and lethal; the disease manifests itself at a comparatively young age and is both debilitating and terminal. It seems quite evident that disclosure of the fact that a prospective marriage partner harbors the gene is mandatory. In fact, it is even arguable that failure to disclose the carrier state for Huntington's disease constitutes a halakhic basis for annulment of the marriage. The certainty of premature interruption of normal marital life may constitute a serious physical defect of the magnitude of a mum gadol, i.e., a major defect, with the result that the marriage may be void ab initio on grounds of kiddushei taut, i.e., error in its inception.

Dr. Fred Rosner

More difficult to resolve is the question as to whether or not an Ashkenazi Jewish woman with the gene for breast cancer BRCA 1 or BRCA 2 is obligated to tell that to a prospective spouse or to her husband K she is already married. Modern rabbinic authorities have not yet ruled on whether it is even appropriate to test for that gene in all Jewish women. It may be reasonable to do so in women with very strong family histories of breast cancer. But to what end? If they are found not to have the gene, then risk of developing breast cancer is still high. But women found to be positive for the gene may wish to take action such as more frequent mammography, prophylactic hormonal treatment, or even prophylactic mastectomies. Current rabbinic authorities need to address these urgent questions to provide guidance on the Jewish religious views on these genetic issues. Should genetic screening include diseases where the clinical outcome is uncertain. For example, in cystic fibrosis, Gaucher's disease, hemophilia and other diseases, early death is rare and the disease expression may be mild, moderate, severe, or life threatening even through adolescence and early adulthood.