Ever since the Human Genome Project has completed, how humans can modify the identified genes became a hot topic. The analysis of the structure of DNA and the locations of genes make artificial genes enhancement possible. Ethical and legal issues were discussed throughout the entire world.
The selection of a baby’s characteristic can be achieved by recombining DNA. The discovery of the double helix structure of DNA by Watson and Crick led to a huge studying wave of DNA. Seventeen years after their discovery, recombinant DNA (rDNA), also known as genetic engineering or gene splicing, was introduced to the world. This is a technology that allowed a new and more precise kind of gene manipulation, not only across species lines but out of the animal kingdom (Morgan, “The Genetics Revolution: History, Fears, And Future Of A Life-Altering Science.”). With the identified functions of genes, in the future scientists are able to add or delete the traits as they want precisely.
The achievement of this technology is just the matter of time. However, the difficulties are more coming from the ethical issues it raised, rather than the science research. Concerns on how the modified humans will affect the society become a hot topic, even raised fear among some people.
A naissance of one new technology always accompanies ethical issues. A fear of gene enhancement spreads widely. One reason is that genetic characteristics selection technology is immature, which could result in unwanted change of humans. Also, gene enhancement may result in unequal distribution. With the rich people having their “superbabies”, poor people would have less chance to diminish the gap between them and the rich. As the report coauthor Mark Frankel, the director of the ...
... middle of paper ...
...ries, 2009. Ebscohost. Web. 20 May 2014.
Morgan, Rose M. “The Genetics Revolution : History, Fears, And Future Of A Life-Altering Science.” Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2006. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 21 May 2014.
Naik, Gautam. "'Designer Babies:' Patented Process Could Lead to Selection of Genes for Specific Traits." Ghose, Tia, and Staff Writer. "The Ethics Of 'Designer Babies'" The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 14 Mar. 2014. Web. 20 May 2014.
Resnik, David B., and Daniel B. Vorhaus. "Genetic Modification and Genetic Determinism." Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2006, 1:9 (2006). PEHM. Web. 20 May 2014.
Steere, Mike. "Designer Babies: Creating the Perfect Child." CNN. Cable News Network, 30 Oct. 2008. Web. 20 May 2014.
Waldman, Paul. "In Praise of Designer Babies." The American Prospect. N.p., 10 Oct. 2013. Web. 29 May 2014.
In today’s modern age science is moving at a rapid pace; one of those scientific fields that has taken the largest leaps is that of genetics. When genetics first comes to mind, many of us think of it as a type of science fiction, or a mystical dream. Yet genetics is here, it is real, and has numerous ethical implications.
Catalano, Michael. "The Prospect of Designer Babies: Is It Inevitable?" The People, Ideas, and Things (PIT) Journal. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2014.
Most people agree, in general, that designer babies are taking over and it is it’s a good thing. A designer baby is a human embryo that parents set , to produce desirable traits. According to Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection , Fertility Institutes in Los Angeles offered to let parents select their children’s hair and eye color. Crazy to think you’d be able to build your own baby. The process of creating this designer baby would be embryos modified to predetermine intellect , physical prowess , and beauty. People may question designer babies but “if you think women have the right to control their bodies , then they should be able to make this choice” right? (Citation?) There is a lot of science into creating a designer baby.
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.
Human characteristics have evolved all throughout history and have been manipulated on a global scale through the use of science and technology. Genetic modification is one such process in which contemporary biotechnology techniques are employed to develop specific human characteristics. Despite this, there are a countless number of negative issues related with genetic modification including discrimination, ethical issues and corruption. Hence, genetic modification should not be used to enhance human characteristics.
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,
Thadani, Rahul. "The Public Should Oppose Designer Baby Technology." Designer Babies. Ed. Clayton Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Designer Babies Debate." http://www.buzzle.com. 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 28 Apr. 2014.
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.
Although humans have altered the genomes of species for thousands of years through artificial selection and other non-scientific means, the field of genetic engineering as we now know it did not begin until 1944 when DNA was first identified as the carrier of genetic information by Oswald Avery Colin McLeod and Maclyn McCarty (Stem Cell Research). In the following decades two more important discoveries occurred, first the 1953 discovery of the structure of DNA, by Watson and Crick, and next the 1973 discovery by Cohen and Boyer of a recombinant DNA technique which allowed the successful transfer of DNA into another organism. A year later Rudolf Jaenisch created the world’s first transgenic animal by introducing foreign DNA into a mouse embryo, an experiment that would set the stage for modern genetic engineering (Stem Cell Research). The commercialization of genetic engineering began largely in 1976 wh...
“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”)
The evolution of technology has been hand in hand with the human subjugation of earth, but the question persists, when does the use of technology go too far? Advances in medical science have increased the average human lifespan and improved the quality of life for individuals. Medical science and biology are steadily arriving at new ways to alter humans by the use of advanced genetic alteration. This technology gives rise to the question of how this new technology ought to be used, if at all. The idea of human enhancement is a very general topic, since humans are constantly “enhancing” themselves through the use of tools. In referring to human enhancement, I am referring specifically to the use of genetic intervention prior to birth. Julian Savulescu, in his, “Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings,” argues that it is not only permissible to intervene genetically, but is a morally obligatory. In this paper, I will argue that it is not morally obligatory to intervene genetically even if such intervention may be permissible under certain criteria. I will show, in contrast to Savulescu’s view, that the moral obligation to intervene is not the same as the moral obligation to prevent and treat disease. In short, I will show that the ability of humans to intervene genetically is not sufficient to establish a moral obligation.
Human Genetic Engineering: Designing the Future 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.
Many debilitating and severe unwanted diseases, genetic disorders and disabilities can be avoided through the creation of designer babies. A child's quality of life would be drastically increased if they evade Down Syndrome, deformities or heart disease for example. In a sense, it isn’t all that different to hearing aid, medication for an illness or chemotherapy for cancer, but on a larger scale and earlier in someone’s life, before it even really begins in fact. Some people would argue that changing genes is changing who people are, which they view as ‘wrong’, but genes aren’t exactly the only things that make up a person anyway. The way that they grow up and their surroundings also make people...
The controversy of these issues stems from the immense potential in genetic sciences for both positive use and harmful misuse. Though the questions and fears of critics reflect the wisdom of caution, the potentially unlimited benefits mandate that we pursue these technologies.
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.