According to Greek mythology, the griefs of life came into existence as a result of the introduction of a woman into a purely man inhabited world. The gods were said to have only created men, until Zeus became angry with mankind and devised the most horrible punishment he could conceive, creating Woman. Zeus instructed the smith of the gods, Hephaestus, to create her from the materials of earth and make her irresistibly beautiful. Each of the Greek gods gave her a gift of skill, and aptly named her Pandora, meaning "all gifted." The messenger god, Hermes, with his winged sandals, took Zeus' ghastly creation down to earth, and with her a box given to her by the gods with instructions that it never be opened. One of the gifts that the gods had bestowed upon Pandora was a lively curiosity. After restraining her eagerness to view the contents of the box, Pandora finally lifted the lid and mistakenly released all nature of evil into the world: sickness, hatred, jealously, suffering, and greed. Just as each of the gods had endowed Pandora with a wonderful gift, so had they each stored in the box the greatest evil they could create. Pandora remorsefully tried to replace the lid on the box, but this awful creation had already instilled its evils forever into the life of man. Only one good thing resulted from Zeus' creation: the spirit of hope, which lay at the bottom of the box. (Geocities, "Pandoras Box") It is this hope for the possibility of extraordinary things in the future that motivates mans' curiosity and persistence in all walks of life. Such innate curiosity and hope is instilled in many by the prospect of eradicating all human suffering from debilitating genetic diseases. Through the discovery of the structure of DN... ... middle of paper ... ...atastrophe- before being given the clearance to proceed" (Watson, pg.400 DNA). The potential for good far outweighs the risks of repeating history, the abuse of technology, or the possibility of offending someone's beliefs. Modern genetics has learned from the mistakes of the past and recognized the lessons learned from the eugenics. Unlike the motives and reasoning behind eugenics, DNA sequence is a definite science that is not open to bias, prejudice, or interpretation. Although prospective parents should be given the choice of whether they want to genetically modify their children, this should only be attempted after bioethical guidelines have been laid, and the science unpinning it has been perfected. Once this science is perfected and fears of new evils have been subdued, then finally the hope that lay at the bottom of Pandora's Box can be made a reality.
SUMMARY: Director of the Ethics Institute, Ronald M. Green, in his article “Building Baby from the Genes Up” discusses why he thinks that genetically modifying babies genes is more beneficial than destructive. He begins his article off by mentioning a story of a couple who wishe to genetically modify their baby so that they could make sure the baby would not develop the long family line of breast cancer. Green then notifies the reader that no matter where they stand on the matter, genetically modifying babies is going to become more and more popular. Even the National Institute of Health is beginning to invest in technology that can be used to genetically modify human genes. He then explains how genetically modifying human genes can be beneficial,
The more we know about genetics and the building blocks of life the closer we get to being capable of cloning a human. The study of chromosomes and DNA strains has been going on for years. In 1990, the Unites States Government founded the Human Genome Project (HGP). This program was to research and study the estimated 80,000 human genes and determine the sequences of 3 billion DNA molecules. Knowing and being able to examine each sequence could change how humans respond to diseases, viruses, and toxins common to everyday life. With the technology of today the HGP expects to have a blueprint of all human DNA sequences by the spring of 2000. This accomplishment, even though not cloning, presents other new issues for individuals and society. For this reason the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) was brought in to identify and address these issues. They operate to secure the individuals rights to those who contribute DNA samples for studies. The ELSI, being the biggest bioethics program, has to decide on important factors when an individual’s personal DNA is calculated. Such factors would include; who would have access to the information, who controls and protects the information and when to use it? Along with these concerns, the ESLI tries to prepare for the estimated impacts that genetic advances could be responsible for in the near future. The availability of such information is becoming to broad and one needs to be concerned where society is going with it.
“The problem with eugenics and genetic engineering is that they represent the one-sided triumph of willfulness over giftedness, of dominion over reverence, of molding over beholding” (Sandel, 2004, p.59).
“The Remastered Race” is an article written by Brian Alexander a journalist who won the John Bartlow Martin award for Public interest journalism from Northwestern University’s Medill school of Journalism. His work has also appeared in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Esquire and Wired amongst others. The Remastered race is an article about genetic engineering and how to use it to the advantage of humans. Throughout this article, Alexander mentioned different ways Eugenics has evolved from time and how it is still evolving but stated his main concern as to how far geneticist should go in reference to engineering embryos.
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.
The history of harmful eugenic practices, spurring from the Nazi implementations of discrimination towards biologically inferior people has given eugenics a negative stigma (1,Kitcher, 190). Genetic testing, as Kitcher sees it through a minimalistic perspective, should be restrained to aiding future children with extremely low qualities of life (2,Kitcher, 190). He believes that genetic engineering should only be used to avoid disease and illness serving the role of creating a healthier human race. He promotes laissez-faire eugenics, a “hands off” concept that corresponds to three components of eugenic practice, discrimination, coercion and division of traits. It holds the underlying works of genetic testing, accurate information, open access, and freedom of choice. Laissez-faire eugenics promises to enhance reproductive freedom preventing early child death due to genetic disease (3,Kitcher, 198). However there are dangers in Laissez-faire that Kitcher wants to avoid. The first is the historical tendency of population control, eugenics can go from avoiding suffering, to catering to a set of social values that will cause the practice of genetics to become prejudiced, insensitive and superficial. The second is that prenatal testing will become limited to the upper class, leaving the lower class with fewer options, creating biologically driven social barriers. Furthermore the decay of disability support systems due to prenatal testing can lead to an increased pressure to eliminate those unfit for society (4,Kitcher, 214).
“Today some patients have their genomes sequenced to shed light on genetic diseases or illnesses like cancer, but one day people will not wait until they are sick, for they will already know the data at birth, says Arthur Beaudet. In this day in time scientist are testing out procedures in which parents will be able to alter their child’s genes. This means parents will have the will to create their child in a way they see fit. Although, this is a technological breakthrough for scientist, many obstacles stand in the way of widespread use of prenatal DNA sequencing. To understand prenatal DNA sequencing scientist must look into the genetic inheritance and DNA of the child, for the procedure itself it creates many positive and negative effects; for the uncertain parents they must look into the procedure and learn from genetic counselors which could be the best choice, not only does providing a genetic counselor endure genetic counselors prenatal DNA sequencing also requires tons of money alone.
Although the advancement of genetic science has provided humans with the ability to choose their child’s sex, eye color, or even intelligence, some believe that it is highly immoral to commercialize this new found power. The Oxford English Dictionary defines eugenics as the science of improving the (especially human) population by controlled breeding for desirable inheritable characteristics (Suckling, 2000). The original purpose of the trait selection, called eugenics, was to check for certain disease-bearing genes. This allowed for parents to choose non-disease bearing embryos using In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) (Steere, 2008). The technology has recently been developing into detecting various other physical traits that will undoubtedly become abused by the general public if it is brought to the commercial market (Suckling, 2000).
Discussion around genetic engineering and reproductive technologies always evolve around preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) -- the method by which early human embryos are genetically removed and then discarded or placed back in the uterus. Ronald Green’s argument in his article Building Baby from the Genes Up is based on an excessively basic understanding of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and genomic science. Green argues that “genomic science is racing toward a future in which foreseeable improvements include reduced susceptibility to a host of diseases, increased life span, better cognitive functioning, and maybe even cosmetic enhancement such as whiter, straightener teeth” (180) is deceiving when we consider the ethical issues of PGD. The risks of misapplication of PGD can lead to eugenics, destruction of embryos and can be used towards non-medical traits such as cosmetics enhancement and the fact of selecting offspring traits itself can be a problem to society.
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.
In today’s world, people are learning a great deal in the rapidly growing and developing fields of science and technology. Almost each day, an individual can see or hear about new discoveries and advances in these fields of study. One science that is rapidly progressing is genetic testing; a valuable science that promotes prevention efforts for genetically susceptible people and provides new strategies for disease management. Unnaturally, and morally wrong, genetic testing is a controversial science that manipulates human ethics. Although genetic testing has enormous advantages, the uncertainties of genetic testing will depreciate our quality of life, and thereby result in psychological burden, discrimination, and abortion.
When created in 1923, the American Eugenics Society exemplified an air of reform with a seemingly positive purpose, however this cannot be further from the truth. In reality, the society polluted the air with myths of weeding out imperfections with the Galtonian ideal, the breeding of the fittest (Carison). The founder of the society, Charles Davensport , preached that those who are imperfect should be eliminated(Marks). From the school desk to the pulpit, the fallacies of the eugenics movement were forced into society. Preachers often encouraged the best to marry the best while biology professors would encourage DNA testing to find out ones fate (Selden). A...
For much of human history, mankind has never been able to shape and alter its genetic information. But with modern day advances in technology and scientific research, the idea is slowly becoming a reality, and a major concern for many, scientifically, practically, and morally. It is only a matter of time before augmenting genetic information begins to modify humans; doing so could bring about positive change, but more likely, terrible consequences for humanity. Although the manipulation of the human genome through introducing foreign DNA has the potential to assist in health and development of organisms, doing so unrestricted ultimately proves to be unethical and problematic once applied to humans.
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.
New technological advances are being mad every day, especially in genetics. With great innovations comes concerns whether it will have a good cause or be used for bad intentions. One of these is eugenics, the idea to improve genetic composition in humans most specifically in future fetuses. The idea started in 1883 by Sir Francis Galton who wanted to selectively breed humans using desired traits to create a perfect human race. This lead to many unethical moments in history such as the sterilization of unfit humans in the 19th century as well as Hitler’s use of eugenics during WWII. However, current use helps identify possible inherited diseases/conditions in unborn children and remove those traits from the DNA. Although eugenics has been used