Science has taken another step forward into the future of mankind by empowering parents to give their children the best start possible. We are now presented the opportunity to decide what personality and features we want our kids to have before their even born. Although at first glance, it may seem amazing and feel as if you’re picking the exact candy bar you want at a convenient store. However, are we ready for mankind to play, what some might call “God”? Is messing with the genetic code in our babies morally right? Or is it wrong? These are questions being brought up towards the matter of genetically engineering our babies. Danielle Simmons mentioned in the 2008 Nature Education that “Genes influence health and disease, as well as human traits and behavior”. Well genetic engineering on human genes has been going on for a long period of time now. It has also been performed on babies of women who were having trouble conceiving to prevent birth deficiency and help produce a healthy baby. As time went on, scientist became more precise and accurate in the genetic engineering of human genes (Simmons). Scientist is now able to help parents make their baby exactly the way, they prefer. Now that we are able to engineer the genetic code in humans to this extent, we can now produce a healthier generation that will have our ideal traits and behavior. Genetically altered babies will have no say in what’s being done to their bodies before birth, and consequently will have to live with whatever happens as a result of genetic tampering. I believe that messing with the genetic code in babies to make them have traits and behaviors the way their parents prefer is morally wrong and that babies genes are made a certain way for a reason. It’ll be as ... ... middle of paper ... ...ture generation healthier. There’s too many questions left unexplained and to many unknown facts about the human genome and how it works. We should not pursue this kind of science, but in fact work on bettering our environment to help influence the development of a healthier generation. Nature will evolve at its own pace, so let’s not take on the role of playing “god” and have a possibility of ending up with a genetic problem. Eventually and hopefully the 30 designer babies that have already been born, will grow and help scientist with their studies. Genetically engineering unborn babies is morally wrong and we shouldn’t alternate a human in anyway, especially if they can’t communicate. Why waste funds on alternating nature, when we can use it for other science that can benefit us other ways? Let’s prevent, what could end up in a major disaster and accept Darwinism.
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.
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...
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.
Many people often ask, “Is it acceptable for human beings to manipulate human genes” (Moral and Ethical Issues in Gene Therapy). Most of the ethical issues centralize on the Christian understanding of a human being. They believe God made them the way they are and people should accept their fate.The Society, Religion and Technology Project have researched and found that countless people are curious if gene therapy is the right thing to do. They have a problem with exploiting the genes a person is born with due to the fact they consider it to be “playing God” (Moral and Ethical Issues in Gene Therapy). They are also concerned with the safety. On account of the unfamiliar and inexperienced technology. Gene therapy has only been around since 1990, so scientists are still trying to find the best possible way to help cure these diseases. Multiple scientists are cautious with whom they share their research. For the reason that if it were to get into in the wrong hands it could conceivably start a superhuman race. Author Paul Recer presumes using germline engineering to cure fatal diseases or even to generate designer babies that will be stronger, smarter, or more immune to infections (Gene Therapy Creates Super-Muscles). Scientists could enhance height, athleticism and even intelligence. The possibilities are endless. Germline engineering, however, would alter every cell in the body. People would no longer have to worry about the alarming and intimidating combinations of their parents’ genes. Genetic engineers are able to eliminate unnatural genes, change existing ones or even add a few extra. Like it or not, in a few short years scientists will have the power to control the evolution of
A man and woman walk into an office where they are greeted by a fertility specialist, who then sets them in front of a computer. Here, the couple is able to scroll through various traits and characteristics, then mix and match them onto a computer generated infant so they can see how their chosen attributes will look when paired together. The man and woman decide on a baby boy with cornsilk blonde hair and emerald green eyes. Their future son will grow to 6 feet tall with an athletic build, have a genius IQ, and a predisposition for baseball. The doctor takes their order, and then schedules an appointment with the soon-to-be-parents to implant the embryo containing all those traits into the mother. While this scene may seem like a moment out of a science fiction novel, it is not too far off what very well may be available in the near future. Medical sciences and technologies are advancing rapidly, and in a society completely preoccupied with obtaining perfection, it should be no surprise to anyone that scientists are playing around with the idea of genetically engineering perfect humans. It is one thing to make the decision to enhance oneself with things like plastic surgery, steroids, collagen, herbal supplements, and so on. There is also nothing wrong with studying hard and practicing in a certain skill to reach expertise. But is it right to decide the fate of a child before he or she even has a chance to decide what they want for their self? Not only is there the sheer matter of right versus wrong, but there also many serious consequences to using such extreme sciences. Because these are new, experimental technologies, there is no predicting what adverse medical effects genetic modification could have on a child. Another plight...
When it comes to the topic of genetic modification some of us will readily agree that humanity would be better off without it. Where as some are convinced that genetic modification may be the best way to go for the next generation, others maintain that it will cause conflict and separation between societies. Some of us can agree that even though scientists say genetic modification is to break the cycle of cancer and other inherited diseases, I say that along with the process comes the option of changing other features in your unborn child. Genetic modification should not occur because even though some consider it a good thing there are still a lot of negative things that come from this like cell imbalance.
of the same sex, then they are more apt to have a third. A second
While all of these viewpoints are legitimate, it still does not remove the blatant fact that there could be genetic consequences of these actions. What happens when as a result of trying to “better” your child, the procedure actually does more harm? Another question to ask the proponents is how can you face your child every day knowing you couldn’t just accept them for who they were, but rather who you wanted them to be? When did playing the role of God become acceptable? All of these questions need to be evaluated before we can make a definite decision to allow ordinary human beings to decide the fate of their child.
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
Genes are, basically, the blueprints of our body which are passed down from generation to generation. Through the exploration of these inherited materials, scientists have ventured into the recent, and rather controversial, field of genetic engineering. It is described as the "artificial modification of the genetic code of a living organism", and involves the "manipulation and alteration of inborn characteristics" by humans (Lanza). Like many other issues, genetic engineering has sparked a heated debate. Some people believe that it has the potential to become the new "miracle tool" of medicine. To others, this new technology borders on the realm of immorality, and is an omen of the danger to come, and are firmly convinced that this human intervention into nature is unethical, and will bring about the destruction of mankind (Lanza).
I. I have chosen the topic of designer babies and if the promise of customizable babies is too good to pass up. I do not have a lot of experience with designer babies, but I do know about designer cattle. Growing up on a farm has provided me with alot of background knowledge on cattle. Over the years, I have learned about the breeding of dairy cattle. My father, as well as most farmers, breed cattle so that they have the best qualities and are close to perfection. When thinking about a topic to write, I thought it would be interesting to learn about the human side of eugenics, since I already knew about it in cattle. To narrow down my topic, I chose to focus on designer babies in just the United States.
Furthermore, another reason why creating designer babies is not ideal is that it will weaken diversity and uniqueness in our world. With human genetic engineering, humanity
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.