More handpicked essays just for you.
Objectives of in vitro fertilization essay
The future of in vitro fertilization
The ethics of designer babies
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Objectives of in vitro fertilization essay
Sarah Ly is a PhD candidate at the University of Pennsylvania where she studied biomedical sciences and neurobiology and at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory where part of her work involved genes and genomics. Ly received the National Merit Scholarship as well as the Robert C. Byrd Honors Scholarship. In her article, “Ethics of Designer Babies,” author Sarah Ly explains that the concept of in vitro fertilization has become a reality and with that, genetically engineered embryos are evolving, thus many people believe regulations are needed. The article states that many believe it should just be used when the child is at risk of a genetic disease and should not be used to permit parents to decide the fate of their children by picking traits.
The second article I have chosen to evaluate for this topic is The Designer Baby Myth written by Steven Pinker. This article starts off by explaining how many people fear the idea of genetic enhancement. Several citizens are concerned about creating the ultimate inequality or changing human nature itself. Many will say technology in medicine is increasing to the point where genetic improvement is inevitable. Steven presents his position on the matter in his thesis statement; “But when it come to direct genetic enhancement-engineering babies with genes for desirable traits-there are many reasons to be skeptical.” He makes it clear that genetic enrichment is not particularly inevitable or likely in our lifetime. He bases his skepticism around three sources; the limits of futurology, science of behavioral genetics, and human nature.
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.
Neoeugenics is the idea of new, “neo”, eugenics or a new way of creating a healthier race. Eugenics was first defined in the late 1800s by a man named Sir Francis Galton who said that it was basically the study of traits that will cause an advantage or disadvantage in the traits of future generations. Eugenics soon turned from being about the use of artificial selection of breeding to create a stronger species, to being about the advancement of certain races over others. When talking about neo eugenics, it is believed that it may turn into something similar to that of eugenics in that the use of artificial selection would now be used to bring the upper class higher in standards of health and wellbeing as well as beauty. Others believe that the use of neo eugenics will help create a healthier, more stable species. Whether bad or good, the way that eugenics will advance will be in designer babies.
The word abortion brings out a variety of attitudes & perceptions amongst people. The topic is surrounded by emotion and empathy, which often creates a divide, those who view abortion as permissible and those who do not. In “Bioethics Before Birth," Tooley and Marquis provide their arguments on abortion. Their arguments share some similarities but their viewpoints and delivery set them apart. I will evaluate and compare the differences and similarities in their arguments.
From designer purses to designer shoes, each one is created single handedly by one person, or the designer. Shaping and molding an item to their specific standards. Through advances in genetic modification scientists have now been able to change, or design an embryotic cell to remove some hereditary genes. Through Richard Hayes’s, Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks, and Ronald Green’s, Building Baby from the Genes Up, they both touch on the negative and positives of genetically modifying human traits in an embryotic cell. Hayes’s article is a critique of Greens but also provides many key argumentative point again the use of genetic modification. Having access to the technology and knowledge to provide children with either less of a chance or no changes to receive hereditary diseases like cancer makes the case of using genetic modification
Insurance companies may be biased against them and charge higher premiums, since they will be at higher risk for health insurance claims, some of which could be very costly to the insurance companies, reducing overall profit. There would be an unfair financial benefit for the genetically designed, longer-living, disease-free babies.
"Imagine the reaction there would be if organ transplantation were prohibited because it is 'unnatural' -- though that is what some people called for when transplantation was a medical novelty.” This quote from Dr. Roger Gosden describes how the general population felt in regards to the first transplant procedures that took place. Those fears have since been extinguished due to the success that transplant surgeries output. Designer babies are a similar medical miracle due to the possible wipeout of genetically inherited diseases. Designer babies are babies whose genetics have been specifically chosen in order to allow a certain gene to be absent or present. Having the choice to choose which genes are inherited allow for children to be born healthy and able to avoid mitochondrial disorders and potentially blindness and deafness. Designer babies are a controversial topic because of cost efficiency and some religious views. However, designer babies are a good idea in a world controlled by disease.
This site was actually a book review. It explained the different viewpoints of genetic engineering in humans. The information was limited because the book was not available to compare with, however, the powerful opposing sides of the article made many great points that maybe not every person would think of. The ideas varied from genetically enhancing children to an extent that parents could decide whether they want their children to be star athlete material, or strong, but gentle people in the future, to creating a child that might as well have “made in the USA” tattooed on his or her arm. This wild idea was inspired because of the chance that parents could pick out eye color, body shape, and color of skin, all before the baby is born. Most of this article focused on the ethics of genetic engineering in humans.
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.
Ly, Sarah. "The Embryo Project Encyclopedia." Ethics of Designer Babies. Arizona State University, 25 Sept. 2013. Web. 03 Apr. 2014.
Ethics is the matter of the heart and when we discuss the heart we will all ways have conflict. Just for the simple fact that ethics in dealing with assisted reproductive technology is like a domino effect, when you answer one question another one arises. When we bring up the law in the United States about marital status and assisted reproductive technology (ART) you must be in a stable relationship, but what I found interesting is they have yet to define a couple, the relationship. Legislation does not allow discretion or the possibility that it was used, there is no grey area. Who qualifies; infertile couples, only married couples, gay couples, lesbian couples, HIV-positive couples what about the 60 year old couple that wants a baby. We are forgetting the single women who want babies also, who made up the rule that if you’re single you can not raise a child as well as a married couple. When bringing up people, we will naturally bring up autonomy.
“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”)
Have you ever heard of the capability to genetically engineer a child? Neither have many of the others around you. There are babies that are born through in-vitro fertilization, a process by which a baby is conceived outside the body and then genetically altered (or personalized) to meet the requirements of this babies’ parents. They could possibly alter a gene that codes for cancer, or simply change their child’s hair to curly, because that is what they prefer. It seems simple, doesn’t it? Well, it isn’t quite that simple.
Parents all have the tendency to want what is best for their children so that they can be in a perfect condition. Designer babies have become a popular topic today. Even though designer babies can be used to create a parent’s perfect child, many still have concerns. Designer babies can have both negative and positive effects; however, reports have only showed them having negative effects on our society. Doctors all believe that designing a baby can not only put the baby at risk, however, also our future society. The process of creating designer babies has not yet been reassured, which have only left doctors and others afraid of going through with this process. Designing a baby may seem easy, however the effects that these babies will bring, can only harm our society.
Many parents want a child that will achieve a lot and leave a mark on this earth, leave a legacy behind. Egg donation, karyomapping and IVF allow for parents to create this child they want. But can “playing god” and creating a child through these options cause more health, social, and ethical problems down the road. Bioengineering through egg donation, IVF, karyomapping, and other techniques should be totally illegal in the United States because of expectations parents will have for children, leftover embryos, medical risk, and custody problems.