Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Genetic engineering and its implications
Genetic engineering people
Genetic engineering and its implications
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Genetic engineering and its implications
Designer Babies In the 21st century, genetics will dominate our food, our health, and our environment. Scientists are now talking about the latest taboo on the horizon, hand picking the genes of our children. The questions arise everywhere from society. Have we gone too far with the human genome project? Do we risk creating children as a medical commodity? Could it ultimately lead to parents demanding genetically-engineered offspring with good looks, intelligence, or athletic abilities? It is my position, from a practical medical perspective, that although this research has much potential, the adverse effects outweigh the positive gains. When this research is used under the motives of cosmetics, it will adversely affect our society and the human race as a whole. Presented in this paper are the types of genetic engineering, their purposes, their potential, and the controversy of this research. There are two main types of genetic engineering. Somatic modifications involve adding genes to cells other than egg or sperm cells. For example, if a person had a disease caused by a defective gene, a healthy gene could be added to the affected cells to treat the disorder. The distinguishing characteristic of somatic engineering is that it is non-inheritable, meaning the new gene would not be passed to the recipient’s offspring. Germline engineering would change genes in eggs, sperm, or very early embryos. This type of engineering is inheritable, meaning that the modified genes would appear not only in any children that resulted from the procedure, but in all succeeding generations. This application is by far the more consequential as it could open the door to the perpetual and irreversible alteration of the human species. In conside... ... middle of paper ... ...nd being able to pick a child and their specific gene should not be allowed. Those who would have their children engineered for cosmetic purposes should not be allowed to do so. There needs to be more public discussion of the issues. Many express unease about genetically redesigning our children by saying that we should not play God. These concerns may have more to do with the ‘playing’ than with the ‘God’ part. Should we be manipulating human biology and society like this? Technically and socially, do we know what we would be doing? The possibilities of physical changes are endless, as are the reprecussions. Works Cited Brownlee, Shannon. “Designer Babies.” Washington Monthly, March 2002 Flam, Faye. “The Ethics of Having a Baby For Another Childs Benefit.” Philadelphia Inquirer Oct 2000 Silver, Lee, Professor and Geneticist, Princeton University. Frontline, PBS.
A person's individuality begins at conception and develops throughout life. These natural developments can now be changed through genetically engineering a human embryo. Through this process, gender, eye and hair color, height, medical disorders, and many more qualities can be changed. I believe genetically engineering a human embryo is corrupt because it is morally unacceptable, violates the child's rights, and creates an even more divided society.
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
After the discovery of genetically altering an embryo before implantation, “designer babies” was coined to describe a child genetically altered “to ensure specific intellectual and cosmetic characteristics.” (“Designer Babies” n.p.). This procedure combines genetic engineering and In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) to make sure certain characteristics are absent or present in an embryo (Thadani n.p.). The procedure also includes taking an embryo to be pre-implementation genetically diagnosed (PGD), another procedure that doctors use to screen the embryos (Stock n.p.). An embryo’s DNA goes through multiple tests to obtain an analysis of the embryo, which will list all the components of the embryo including genetic disorders and physical traits such as Down syndrome, blue eyes, and brown hair, for instance (Smith 7). Although the use of PGD is widely accepted by the “reproductive medical community” and the modifying of disorders or diseases is to a degree, once the characteristics are no longer health related “72% disapprove of the procedure” (“Designer Babies” n.p.). At this point the parents make decisions that would alter their child’s life forever and this decision is rather controversial in the U...
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,
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.
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.
People should not have access to genetically altering their children because of people’s views on God and their faith, the ethics involving humans, and the possible dangers in tampering with human genes. Although it is many parent’s dream to have the perfect child, or to create a child just the way they want, parents need to realize the reality in genetic engineering. Sometimes a dream should stay a figment of one’s imagination, so reality can go in without the chance of harming an innocent child’s life.
[7] Stock, G., and Campbell, J.. "Engineering the Human Germline: an Exploration of the Science and Ethics of Altering the Genes We Pass to Our Children, New York; Oxford University Press, 2000. back
As Dr. Michael Jarmulowicz stated, "All children should be born for their own sake, not as a purpose for someone else's benefit" (BBC News).
The concept of designer babies has been around for some time, with the first gene therapy test occurring in 1990. It is still in a developmental stage, but in recent years, people have begun to pay more attention to this technology. It is expected to be ready for business, to some extent, in the coming years. Aside from medical concerns, people also question the morals of the process. Is it okay for us to play god and dictate the genetic makeup of unborn babies?
Human genetic engineering can provide humanity with the capability to construct “designer babies” as well as cure multiple hereditary diseases. This can be accomplished by changing a human’s genotype to produce a desired phenotype. The outcome could cure both birth defects and hereditary diseases such as cancer and AIDS. Human genetic engineering can also allow mankind to permanently remove a mutated gene through embryo screening as well as allow parents to choose the desired traits for their children. Negative outcomes of this technology may include the transmission of harmful diseases and the production of genetic mutations. The benefits of human genetic engineering outweigh the risks by providing mankind with cures to multiple deadly diseases.
Genetic engineering can improve the overall health of the human population by eliminating diseases such as HIV, hypercholesterolemia, sickle-cell anemia, hemophilia, and even forms of genetic blindness. Genetic engineering can also be used to affect many other non-health related traits such as prevent baldness, improve one’s height, or change the size of one’s nose. This is accomplished by changing the genetic code in babies before they are born. Most people are in favor of using this technology to prevent illnesses in babies, but question the advantages of using it to alter the physical appearance of children. To some people, the concept of “designing babies” is a wonderful way to ensure their children are products of their exact liking; others find it to be invasive of human nature. Some scientists think the applications of genetically modifying babies could be slightly dangerous, but feel that “environmental uses are more worrisome than a few modified people” (Regalado2). The real issue at stake however is when the dynamics of families across the world are so drastically perversed, society as a whole will suffer (Regalado2?). With the lack of regulations on genetic engineering, people are basically free to entirely create their children however they like. Most people find similar qualities of children to be desirable, so genetically modified people will lack less desirable and unique qualities, which will inevitably lead to a less diverse human race. By deciding for ourselves how we want our children to look, we are essentially playing the role of God and are stripping nature of its right to create pure, naturally evolved life. Not only does designing children interfere with nature, but it also undermines the relationship between parents and their children “by increasing the power of parents to control the biological properties of their offspring” (Foht).
Despite all the varieties and interpretations we can still identify some central themes, values, and interests that give transhumanism its distinct identity. Through the H+ movement the technologies to allow for genetic selection have flourished (Hughes). Through these technologies many fear parents will see their children as products rather than their children. Ronald Green states in Babies by Designs“Parents’ response to a new child might go from excited appreciation to asking how well the newcomer measures up to expectations.”(109). Although this can be a legitimate concern a genuine moral respect for embryos can be joined with their use, alterations, and destruction in legitimate research. Those who choose to genetically alter their child are doing it for the benefit of their child. Many clinics have offered cosmetic alterations, but parents who use these options may feel it is the best option for their child. Meaning parents may see certain traits as “bully targets.” Some may see these alteration options as a tear at the “love yourself” movement others see this as solving an impossible problem. (Hughes)
Designer Babies I’ve been poked and prodded at ever since I can remember, but what I didn’t know was that I was actually poked and prodded at an individual even before my existence. Transplanted DNA is what they should have named me instead of Wang. I find my existence to be not as real or as wanted as others who were conceived naturally with both loving parents and even the idea of other loving parents adopting their children. It just seems unfair that my parents would make decisions for me before I was even born. The idea of someone wanting to create their child is absurd.