Imagine a world where parents scan through pods filled with different possibilities for their embryos. They design their child in the image of a Disney princess. Hair as dark as night, lips as red as blood, and skin as fair as snow. This could soon become the reality as fertility technology becomes increasingly advanced. Parents can use pre-implementation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to manipulate the genetic makeup of their children. Currently, PGD is used to screen embryos for deficiencies in genes; it will be altered if any are found before being returned to the womb which is executed through test-tube fertilization. Theoretically, PGD could be used to engineer embryos, thus the term “designer babies” has been coined, which according to the Oxford English Dictionary is a “baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected by genetic engineering combined with In Vitro Fertilization (IVF).” “Designer babies” are shrouded in controversy and are not the miracle some people claim them to be. Parents should not be able to use genetics to manipulate the physical appearance/abilities and social traits such as intelligence of their unborn children.
Currently, there are no laws in the United States regulating fertility clinics with non-medical genetic engineering of embryos, even though the fertility industry is worth approximately $3 billion. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) provides voluntary rules that, according to a survey conducted by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), fewer than 20% of our fertility clinics abide by. Seventy-seven percent of the world’s 30 industrialized countries have banned non-medical used of PGD on embryos, it is definitely time the U.S. jumps on the bandwagon.
Genetic ...
... middle of paper ...
... Clayton Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Deliver Us from Designer Babies: Without Strong New Laws, We Will Have Many More Dr. Jeff Steinbergs." New York Daily News 6 Mar. 2009. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 27 Apr. 2014.
"Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 21 Apr. 2014. Web. 27 Apr. 2014.
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. 7 Apr. 2014.
"The Need to Regulate 'Designer Babies'." Designer Babies. Ed. Clayton Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "The Need to Regulate 'Designer Babies,'." Scientific American (May 2009). Opposing Viewpoints in Contex
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.
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.
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.
Clayton Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "Designer Babies Debate." http://www.buzzle.com. 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 29 Apr. 2014.
In vitro fertilization is a procedure to treat the genetic failure in the ovaries that allow a women to naturally conceive a child. Today’s advancements in technology has changed the in vitro fertilization market in many different ways. Personally being a product and witness of the “test tube” baby generation, I understand the happiness and completeness a family experiences when these procedures are successful. On the other hand, although people know a lot about this procedure, most don’t understand the negative effects it can have on families due to extreme technological advancements if government doesn’t enforce strict regulations on this market. I believe this market needs extreme government intervention in order to prevent the harmful future
However, stakeholders are those who play a crucial part and stand to benefit, or lose from it. The four main stakeholders here are (1) the babies who are the most affected stakeholders, not able to make choices for themselves; (2) their parents who wants the best for their children; (3) the government who is accountable for the laws and regulations of PGD; and (4) the researchers or medical institutions who depend on government approval to research and allow medical institutions to carry out their work (Stakeholders in Designer Babies, 2009).
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.
While learning in sociology 101, I found an interesting theory that relates to the topic, “Designer Babies”. I will be stating viewpoints about some examples that I researched. In the book, Essentials of Sociology by James M. Henslin, our class identified the interpretation of the word McDonaldization. The definition of the word works perfectly with the principles and understanding tactics of designer babies, or gene editing. The definition of McDonaldization is the process by which ordinary aspects of life are rationalized and efficiency comes to rule them, including such things as food preparation (Henslin,year). Although I 'm not discussing fast food, I 'm discussing how designer babies are unique and are out of the normal tradition .
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.
Dahl, Edgar. "Babies By Design: A Response To Martin Johnson's Moral Case Study On Tissue Typing." Reproductive Biomedicine Online (Reproductive Healthcare Limited) 9.6 (2004): 597-598. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 May 2014.
Keiper, Adam, and Yuval Levin. “Federal Funds Should Not Be Used for Research That Destroys Embryos.” Stem Cells. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from “Stem Cells, Life, and the Law.”National Review (25 Aug. 2010). Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 15 Apr. 2013.
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.
“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”)
Pray, Leslie A., Ph.D. “Embryo Screening and the Ethics of Human Genetic Engineering.” Nature.com. Nature Publishing Group, 2008. Web. The Web.
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...