We are closer that humanity ever has been to being able to intentionally manipulate DNA and thereby being capable of creating organisms that can dramatically improve our lives and wellbeing as a species. However, genetic engineering has to be appropriately regulated, taking into consideration ethical issues such as human rights, the dignity of the individual, harmful consequences and issues of morality followed by them. This paper will try to expand upon various views on genetic engineering and will pay homage to my background writing engineering research papers to consider the ethics of genetic engineering-the designer baby, cloning, how it relates to ethics in engineering generally, and the responsibilities of engineers and the concerns of …show more content…
Some of the techniques used include using needles to insert DNA into an ovum; hybridomas and recombinant DNA, in which the DNA of a desired gene is inserted into the DNA of a bacterium.(Columbia University, 2007) Genetic Engineering can do some undeniably wonderfully sounding things like repairing a genetic defect, picking a select group of genes to achieve a specific outcome in the case of designer babies, curing diseases by altering the gene, and testing for inherited diseases. Genetic engineering has given scientists the power to alter the very basis of life on earth. While the chance at perfecting the human gene is intoxicating, it can also be alarming. For example you could determine the extent of the potential of your child's future simply by paying to specify their gender, skin, eye and hair colour as well as their level of intelligence. There are currently few laws pertaining to the collection and use of personal genetic information, so this is a modern and cutting edge idea that we get to work with. While that can be exciting in terms of academic achievements that are available and unclaimed, we also have a lot less to draw on morally from our preceding …show more content…
The act of human cloning raises important socio-ethical implications in cases where cloning might change the shape of a family's structure by mixing the role of parenting within a family of complex relations. An example of this is when a female DNA donor would be the clone's genetic twin, rather than mother, complicating the genetic and social relationships between mother and child as well as the relationships between other family members and the clone. The ethical questions we need to ask in these situations, specifically one where a child is genetically bred to be a donor is whether doctors and parents producing another child are doing so exclusively in order to act as an organ donating factory, and also the moral question of how the child would feel about the process. Designer babies produced to save the lives or health of their siblings or parents would know that they have been brought into existence solely to satisfy a need and not out of love for their own existence. If the creation of these babies is allowed, it would seem like society views these new human beings as mere instruments for the good of others. This causes serious socio-political, economic, ethical and religious upheavals in societies that have only just began to realise and embrace the
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
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.
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 ...
Richard Williams proposed that the issue of human freedom be re-conceptualized. Rejecting the traditional view of self-direction as the possibility of choosing among alternatives, Williams suggested that we ground our understanding of individual freedom in morality. In this view, human freedom is enhanced as one "lives truthfully." Truthful living runs counter to self-deception and thereby opens the way for greater freedom, which is fundamentally concerned with being, or existing. It is also concerned with doing or choosing, but only as such individual actions harmonize with an already existing schema of existence When the act of choosing results in self-deception, one cannot automatically assume that choice has been exercised. If deception occurs, one has merely used the freedom to choose to step out of the arena in which it exists. The Aristotelian ethics concurs with the basic tenets of Williams' philosophy.
Genetic engineering is the “science of altering and cloning genes” to treat diseases but it can also branch out to the creation of designer babies or human modification according to Dictionary.com. DNA faulty is said to be the “major causes of death and disability, including cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease and diabetes” (Merz). People deem the practice of genetic engineering as a breakthrough for humans because of the possibility of humans cure of cancer or diseases. This is an accomplishment because of its purpose of saving lives but some argue what consequences it will bring. One of them being experimentation and the amount of time it will take scientists to produce their desire result. From the article “Designer People,” the author
They say money makes the world go round. And so, it makes seance that there is a lot of competition for the money consumers bring to those who have something they think is worth selling. Unfortunately this also means there are those out there who seek to manipulate consumers. Most people would agree that misleading or not telling the full truth about something is the same as outright lying about it. These producers attempt to target and unethically sell to uninformed consumers.
A recent controversial topic that was discussed in class is the process of cloning. The novel Never Let Me Go is a literary work displaying cloning in England during the 1990’s. The clones are raised and nurtured until they are completely matured. After maturation, they are used for organ donations that are used for “normal” non-clone human beings. The outcomes from cloning taps into the morality and ethicality of human existence. Numerous questions are raised about the outcomes from cloning and some of the answers contradict the morals that humans have concerning what is means to live as a human being. “Cloning refers to asexual reproduction, reproduction without fertilization” (Harris 2). Due to recent advancements in cloning technologies, the foreign process of cloning human beings does not sound like science fiction but a glimpse into the reality of the future. Cloning does not only threaten humans’ previous way of classifying life but leaps into the realm of ethicality. While some may say that cloning human beings is unethical, the counter argument poses the benefits of cloning go way past the argued ethics of human existence. Even though there are benefits, the ethics of making an entire new human being from another one is unethical but some small scale cloning appears to meet ethical “guidelines” and provide benefits toward medicinal practice.
If a limit is not set between using genetic engineering for treatment and using genetic engineering for enhancement, then many parents could use it purely for eugenic purposes. This could cause ethical concerns but social concerns as well. If this was allowed to occur, it would also give the rich even more advantages than they already have to begin with and drive the social classes even farther apart. The use of genetic engineering may also lead to genetic discrimination. As in the movie Gattaca, a person could easily get a print-out of his or her genotype, this information could then be used by schools, employers, companies, and others; giving rise to a new form of discrimination based on a person’s genetic profile. As the world is already full of discrimination, genetic engineering would even increase the numbers of discrimination against people.
As the rate of advancements in technology and science continue to grow, ideas that were once viewed as science fiction are now becoming reality. As we collectively advance as a society, ethical dilemmas arise pertaining to scientific advancement, specifically concerning the controversial topic of genetic engineering in humans. Human genetic engineering increasingly causes dissonance between various groups of scientific and religious groups of people in regards to if we should or should not ‘play god’ and attempt to modify humans for the better of the race. First, let’s take a look at what exactly genetic engineering is; according to, yourgenome.org, “Genetic engineering refers to the direct manipulation of DNA to alter an organism’s
It is clear that the environment is a complex and diverse system that requires our careful attention as human beings, especially now in the 21st century, due to our great impact on it in ways never before seen. Because of the complexity and effect of the natural world on humans, and reciprocally the effect of humans on the environment, it is logical to ask about our actions in the environment. When we make decisions on this subject, we should not only observe the scientific or technological points of view on whether something can be done or not, but also consider the ethical points of view. Today a topic of debate for some years has been the Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) or transgenic. According to the United Nations, GMOs are organisms
Imagine yourself in a society in which individuals with virtually incurable diseases could gain the essential organs and tissues that perfectly match those that are defected through the use of individual human reproductive cloning. In a perfect world, this could be seen as an ideal and effective solution to curing stifling biomedical diseases and a scarcity of available organs for donation. However, this approach in itself contains many bioethical flaws and even broader social implications of how we could potentially view human clones and integrate them into society. Throughout the focus of this paper, I will argue that the implementation of human reproductive cloning into healthcare practices would produce adverse effects upon family dynamic and society due to its negative ethical ramifications. Perhaps the most significant conception of family stems from a religious conception of assisted reproductive technologies and cloning and their impact on family dynamics with regard to its “unnatural” approach to procreation. Furthermore, the broader question of the ethical repercussions of human reproductive cloning calls to mind interesting ways in which we could potentially perceive and define individualism, what it means to be human and the right to reproduction, equality and self-creation in relation to our perception of family.
The technology of genetic manipulation is allowing the future to be full of possibilities whether they are improvements or disadvantages. Presently, genetic manipulation is allowing us do amazing things like designing babies. It can allow us to make sure that the future child does not have incurable diseases or genetic disorders, and the features of the baby can almost be selected from its parents. However, many may believe that genetic manipulating to produce designer babies is not an ethical way and natural way to create the baby. People are also questioning whether the parents of the baby have the actual right to genetically manipulating their baby.
Genetic engineering has been around since the 1960’s although major experiments have not been really noticed until the 1990’s. The science comes in different forms the two major being cloning and genetic reconstruction. Cloning is the duplicating of one organism and making an exact copy. For example in 1996 the creation of the clone sheep named Dolly the first mammal to be cloned which was a great achievement. The other form, genetic reconstruction, is used to replace genes within humans to help or enhance the life of an unborn child for a medical reason or just for the preference of a parent.
Scientists and the general population favor genetic engineering because of the effects it has for the future generation; the advanced technology has helped our society to freely perform any improvements. Genetic engineering is currently an effective yet dangerous way to make this statement tangible. Though it may sound easy and harmless to change one’s genetic code, the conflicts do not only involve the scientific possibilities but also the human morals and ethics. When the scientists first used mice to practice this experiment, they “improved learning and memory” but showed an “increased sensitivity to pain.” The experiment has proven that while the result are favorable, there is a low percentage of success rate. Therefore, scientists have concluded that the resources they currently own will not allow an approval from the society to continually code new genes. While coding a new set of genes for people may be a benefitting idea, some people oppose this idea.
Lee Silver’s article “Reprogenetics: A Glimpse of things to Come” explores the future possibility of human cloning. Silver describes a theoretical situation of an expectant mother who is carrying her own clone. This ‘sci-fi’ plot is a looming possibility with the numerous medical advancements. As the Bible does not directly condemn human cloning Christians must infer whether this is right or wrong. Wayne Joseph’s, an author for the Christian Courier, wrote “The Ethics of Human Cloning” he describes a series of the moral implications of cloning. He asks why scientists want to clone human beings. He answers this question by writing, “…they are anxious to create a brand of create a brand of humans with whom they can experiment.” He compares their actions as being similar to Adolf Hitler during the cold war. He describes scientists’ actions as being similar to slavery. That clones would be destroyed in the misguided notion, that is purportedly to improve the quality of life.