Designer Babies
Science is creating a world where human life is no longer a beautiful miracle but a manufactured and carefully structured design, where the entirety of a person is hand picked and selected by someone else. By genetically engineering a persons life, we are altering what it means to be a human and creating an entirely different world for humanity. In a world of all designer humans, which is defined as any person whose genetics have been modified for purpose of enhancement, the word humanity will be obsolete. Today, we find that reproduction is making a rapid shift from the bedroom to the laboratory (Tuhus-Dubrow 2007). Modern science is consistently challenging what it means to be human and is making these designer babies much
…show more content…
Genetic engineering will never be as safe as natural reproduction because there are simply too many negative ramifications (Green 2007). Talking about genetic modification Stuart Newman, a professor at the New York Medical College, says, “All scientists know that when you do a biological experiment it sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t. If it works 70-80% of the time you are really lucky” (McKibben 2003). Genetic modification is especially risky because it is difficult to predict the outcome when scientists are working with a structure made of many different parts, all of which interact with each other. The smallest mistake could be disastrous to a person’s entire body because nature has created our bodies to work together as a whole (Tudge …show more content…
These “designer babies” are set on a more set life course. Even with advantageous alterations like increased athletic ability and musical talent they are lacking freedom to make life choices as these genetic changes lead children toward a certain life (Sandel 2007). A genetically altered child will constantly be wondering whether their accomplishments are to be accredited to modified interests and abilities or their own personal achievements. Are failures to be taken personal or blame it on a malfunction of their given genetic coding? Children will never learn life lessons if they are always asking themselves if it is them, their parents, or a team of geneticists that are to be held responsible for their failures and achievements (Green 2007). McKibben puts it perfectly in his book
Once altered, the baby will have no say in how its cells are used, or traits they wish to keep but no longer will have the chance too. Some designer babies are created to help others through transplants. Even though the intention may be decent, it is still taking away the child's chance to have a choice in his body. Certain transplants are painful, such as a bone marrow transplant, and creating the child to be used as a donor could possibly put him through involuntary pain.
However, with genetic engineering this miracle of like is taken and reduced to petty “character creation” picking and choosing what someone else thinks should “make them special”. An unborn child that undergoes genetic treatments in this fashion is known as a designer baby (“Should Parents Be Permitted to Select the Gender of Their Children?”). By picking and choosing the traits of a child these designer babies bear similarities to abortion, choosing to get rid of the original child in favor of a “better” one. It is also unfair to deprive a child of their own life. By removing the element of chance and imputing their own preferences, children become treated more as an extension of their parents than as living beings with their own unique life. Parents could redirect a child’s entire life by imposing their wishes before they are even born, choosing a cookie cutter tall, athletic boy over a girl with her own individual traits, or any other choice that would redirect a child’s
The designer kids would think they are better than an average kid. The process of genetically engineering a child is expensive. This means the poor people can not even think about creating a baby , they do not have the money for it. Genes often have more than one use , so creating a baby is not the best choice. Therefore altering a gene could have adverse or even fatal effects. With designer babies it allows parents to give their child a better shot at healthy lifestyle preventing genetic diseases such as down syndrome , alzheimer’s , huntington’s disease , spinal muscular , atrophy and many others. The thought of designer babies could possibly take over. But how do you feel living with a sort of robot? Would people look at your child differently? Would designer babies be able to reproduce correctly? The pros on Designer Babies are very intense and serious. They have the ability to give a human everything they would want in a
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...
The topic of designer babies is a very controversial topic based on if it’s safe, inhuman or dangerous towards the baby. As readers can infer from reading the article, Janssens believes that designer babies will not live up to its expectations of being able to editing anything, such as personality traits. Janssens says as she argues her debate, “What makes people intelligent, for instance, isn’t a combination of the “right genes” and the “right environment,” but the “right combination” of genes and environment” (Janssens 3). Even though it would be hard to change personality traits, you can get rid of diseases, but this might have an effect of creating more diseases. Janssens states that, “other diseases mentioned as future targets for gene editing, such as sickle cell disease and Duchenne muscular dystrophy, are caused by single gene mutations [...] gene increases the risk of one disease while decreasing the risk of another.” (Janssens 2). Based on what readers have read, it is clear that Janssens believes that designer babies will not be successful because one edited gene can lead to more problems with other
If you could ensure that your future children would be healthy, would you? This is a trivial question because most parents would stop at nothing to ensure that their children are healthy. Human germ-line engineering may soon make it possible to alter the genome of human embryos—permanently changing the genetic blueprint for every cell in an embryo’s body. Through human germ-line technology we could eradicate many debilitating genetic diseases (e.g. Tay-Sachs disease, cystic fibrosis etc.), prevent cancer, and even increase the average life span. Human germ-line engineering is prenatal and produces genetically modified traits that can be passed along to subsequent generations—so the resulting genetic alterations are permanent. The utilization of human germ-line engineering technology, however, is analogous to Pandora’s Box. As attractive as it may seem, opening Pandora’s Box and unleashing human germ-line engineering technology could have severe consequences including negative medical or economic ramifications and a potential amplification of social and economic stratification. In this paper I will present views on the consequences and possible regulation of human germ-line engineering. I propose that the risks of human germ-line engineering technology outweigh the potential benefits and therefore this technology needs to be banned.
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.
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.
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).
“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”)
Human Genetic Engineering: Designing the Future As the rate of advancements in technology and science continue to grow, ideas that were once viewed as science fiction are now becoming reality. As we collectively advance as a society, ethical dilemmas arise pertaining to scientific advancement, specifically concerning the controversial topic of genetic engineering in humans.
Human genetic engineering has the capability to transmit usually fatal diseases. Although transmission is highly unlikely, it is one of the risk factors scientists have taken into great consideration. If animal cells or organs are transplanted into humans, zoonotic diseases may be spread. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, Porcine Endogenous Retroviruses, and Nipah Encephalitis are all potentially fatal zoonotic diseases that could be transferred (Glenn). According to Linda MacDonald Glenn, J.D., L.L.M., “The introduction of these diseases to the human population could have devastating consequences” (Glenn). Human genetic engineering may also cause the production of unwanted mutations such as developmental issues. The procedures that would be used for genetically modifying human cells would include numerous alterations to sperm, eggs, stem cells, or embryos before entering a woman’s uterus. This could potentially modify the growth and development of the fetus in ways that have not yet b...
The Safety of genetic engineering is something that presents much concern. Looking at the current precautions and previous precautions of the biotechnological industry can clear up the safety issue. The FDA and State Governments impose limits such as the illegalization of human cloning and limits on other genetic engineering processes. The only legal forms of genetic engineering that are used today are in vitro fertilization, artificial insemination, and sperm banks.
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.