A new trend lately is BuzzFeed quizzes that vary in category. You can take a quiz that tells you what celebrity you are most alike, who you should marry, and even what your occupation or college major should be. The way these quizzes work is that you are asked a bunch of random questions that make you choose between colors, traits, hobbies, and food. As if a color dictates if you should be a teacher or a lawyer. It’s ridiculous. But this isn’t just happening on BuzzFeed; it is also happening in our everyday lives. People are making lists of traits, colors, and hobbies; except the results won’t necessarily be for them. But for their child, and their child has not even been conceived yet. Planning for a baby shouldn’t be as easy as an online quiz. It shouldn’t be up to the parents to decide the genetic makeup of their unborn child. Genetic engineering is nothing new. “Genetic engineering refers to a set of technologies that are being used to change the genetic makeup of cells and move genes across species boundaries to produce novel organisms” (“What is Genetic Engineering?”). Using genetic engineering will allow parents to choose what traits their child will have. For example, the color of the child’s eyes, skin, and hair will be decided. As well as choosing the height of the baby and weight it will be able to be. Scientists are also finding ways to eliminate diseases in babies. “In February, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) met to consider conducting clinical trials to test out genetic manipulation techniques to prevent mitochondrial disease from occurring in offspring” (Ghose). With all the advancements science has made, being able to cure and vaccinate against diseases isn’t much of a shock. But when will the ethics come into play? Designing a child is not natural. Natural would be in the womb and not in a petri dish. Those who design children take the easy way out of parenting. They are practically saying they have no time to put into their child’s future, so they will just pay for it. Works Cited: Frontline. PBS, n.d. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Ghose, Tia. “Children to Order: The Ethics of ‘Designer Babies.’” LiveScience. N.p., 13 Mar. 2014. Web. 3 May 2014. “What Is Genetic Engineering?” Union of Concerned Scientists. N.p., 18 July 2003. Web. 3 May 2014.
Suter, Sonia M. "A Brave New World Of Designer Babies?." Berkeley Technology Law Journal 22.2 (2007): 897-969. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 May 2014.
However , a gap in society could corrupt. Creating classes that distinguish designer babies from those that are not. Creating a kid versus a natural born kid could
Of?"http://www.siumed.edu/medhum/electives/HealthPolicyMedia/wk5Stock.pdf 22.11 (2003). Rpt. in Designer Babies. Ed. Clayton Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 2 May 2014.
In recent years, great advancement has been made in medicine and technology. Advanced technologies in reproduction have allowed doctors and parents the ability to screen for genetic disorders (Suter, 2007). Through preimplantation genetic diagnosis, prospective parents undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) can now have their embryo tested for genetic defects and reduce the chance of the child being born with a genetic disorder (Suter, 2007). This type of technology can open the door and possibility to enhance desirable traits and characteristics in their child. Parents can possibly choose the sex, hair color and eyes or stature. This possibility of selecting desirable traits opens a new world of possible designer babies (Mahoney,
What do one think of when they hear the words “Designer Babies”? A couple designing their own baby of course, and it’s become just that. Technology has made it possible for there to be a way for doctors to modify a babies characteristics and its health. Genetically altering human embryos is morally wrong, and can cause a disservice to the parents and the child its effecting.
While people may have little insight into the new developments of designer babies, science has explored and expanded genetic editing. “Manipulating genes is legal”. According to Chinese scientist who created such technology. (in slide show). In 1994, the argument was to have equal rights so the poor get the same treatment like the rich. (embryo.aus). in adjacent to the statistics, some studies indicate Americans would like to know if their child would develop Alzheimer’s, or cancer (put statistics in a slide show) . (genetic technology pg 6,7). The Harvard STAT and Harvard T.H. Chan school of public health found that people now have mixed and apparently not firm vies on designer babies. The outcome was split between whether the federal government should fund, research on editing genes( polls).. For instance, The food and drug administration centers for Medicaid, Medicare services, and the federal trade commission regulates genetic testing and research in the US. There is no law forbidding genetic manipulation in humans. (site this). There are many great reasons why designer babies should be valid. With new technology curing diseases is an awesome way to use (PGD), it is possible to save a human from being
Picture a young couple in a waiting room looking through a catalogue together. This catalogue is a little different from what you might expect. In this catalogue, specific traits for babies are being sold to couples to help them create the "perfect baby." This may seem like a bizarre scenario, but it may not be too far off in the future. Designing babies using genetic enhancement is an issue that is gaining more and more attention in the news. This controversial issue, once thought to be only possible in the realm of science-fiction, is causing people to discuss the moral issues surrounding genetic enhancement and germ line engineering. Though genetic research can prove beneficial to learning how to prevent hereditary diseases, the genetic enhancement of human embryos is unethical when used to create "designer babies" with enhanced appearance, athletic ability, and intelligence.
On the website www.debate.org/opinions/should-there-be-designer-babies they discuss a range of opinions that both justify as well as diminish the idea of designer babies. One quote in particular "We could have healthy babies from any diseases... it would be...
"When they are finally attempted…genetic manipulations will…be done to change a death sentence into a life verdict." In agreeing with this quote by James D. Watson, director of the Human Genome Project, I affirm today’s resolution, "Human genetic engineering is morally justified." I will now present a few definitions. Human genetic engineering is the altering, removal, or addition of genes through genetic processes. Moral is "pertaining to right conduct; ethical." Justified is to be "proper; well-deserved." Therefore, something that is morally justified is ethically beneficial. My value today will be cost-benefit justice. When we examine the benefits that human genetic engineering provides to society, these benefits will outweigh any costs and will thus affirming the resolution will provide for justice. I will now present one observation—the existence of human genetic engineering will not be without limits. Patrick Ferreira, the director of medical genetics at the University of Alabama Hospitals, notes that a "technological imperative [states] that the development of extraordinary powers does not automatically authorize their use." In other words, the point of technology is to be careful, and as with any technology, a society will be meticulous in its understanding of human genetic engineering. I will now present 3 contentions that uphold my value of cost benefit justice.
Web. 19 Apr. 2013. "Genetic Engineering." GRACE Communications Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web.
Imagine a parent walking into what looks like a conference room. A sheet of paper waits on a table with numerous questions many people wish they had control over. Options such as hair color, skin color, personality traits and other physical appearances are mapped out across the page. When the questions are filled out, a baby appears as he or she was described moments before. The baby is the picture of health, and looks perfect in every way. This scenario seems only to exist in a dream, however, the option to design a child has already become a reality in the near future. Parents may approach a similar scenario every day in the future as if choosing a child’s characteristics were a normal way of life. The use of genetic engineering should not give parents the choice to design their child because of the act of humans belittling and “playing” God, the ethics involved in interfering with human lives, and the dangers of manipulating human genes.
Usage of genetic modification to pick and chose features and personality traits of embryos could conceivably occur in future times. Wealthy individuals could essentially purchase a baby with built-in genetic advantages (Simmons). Ethically, these seem immoral. Playing God and taking control over the natural way of life makes some understandably uneasy. Ultimately, religious and moral standpoints should play a role in the future of genetic engineering, but not control it. Genetic engineering’s advantages far outweigh the cost of a genetically formulated baby and
Science and technology are rapidly advancing everyday; in some ways for the better, and in some, for worse. One extremely controversial advance is genetic engineering. As this technology has high potential to do great things, I believe the power genetic engineering is growing out of control. Although society wants to see this concept used to fight disease and illness, enhance people 's lives, and make agriculture more sustainable, there needs to be a point where a line is drawn.
Most parents have the tendency to want what is best for their children so they are in the best condition possible. Designer babies have become a popular topic today. Even though designer babies are in effect to create a parents “perfect” child, still comes with many concerns. Designer babies can have both negative and positive effects on society.
“It 's not easy as “I want to buy and egg,” states, the director of the Donor Egg Bank, Brigid Dowd. “Not everyone realizes what 's involved, and then when they hear the cost, many just pass out.” (CGS: Designing the $100,000 Baby,” par. 13) It is a fact that having certain traits are valuable, so this shows that the mere modification used on the designer baby, the more the cost. “If you are too rigid or become too obsessed with finding the perfect image you have in mind, the choice can become more difficult,” says Dowd. (“CGS: Designing the $100,000 Baby,”par. 16) The practice of human genetic modification will not be fair because only the wealthy will have enough money to spend on designing a baby. Therefore, the wealthy will have much more advantages such as longer, healthier, and successful lives. If only people of high class are able to afford designer babies, it will cause an even greater inequality between the rich and the poor (“The Ethics of Designer Babies”). It will also create a society based on “Social Darwinism”- The survival of the fittest. If creating designer babies will cause more inequalities and Social Darwinism, why should we allow this practice? (“The ethics of Designer Babies”)