Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Embryonic stem cells essay
Embryonic stem cells essay
Embryonic stem cells essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Embryonic stem cells essay
In this day in age, where looks are almost everything when getting and going where you want, having a child with perfect genes is something to brag about. Allowing a parent to choose the perfect genes is not so far off in the future, in fact, it is now possible to pick some of the genes of a baby to make a “perfect” child. A procedure called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, has been used for years by doctors who wanted to reduce the chance of women carrying babies infected with life-threatening diseases. PGD was first used to improve the likelihood of a successful pregnancy for couples suffering with recurring miscarriages and parents who had the chance of passing on genetic diseases to their offspring. Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg, a reproductive endocrinologist, has fertility institutes in Manhattan and Los Angeles and has assisted thousands of couples around the country in choosing the gender of their child. Dr. Steinberg has expanded the options of the PGD cycle to include eye, hair and skin color when making a perfect baby. "I can't say with 100 percent certainty that parents will be able to choose something like eye color -- more like 80 percent certainty," Steinberg said. Allowing parents to choose the genes of their child may eventually cause society to shun those who cannot afford the PGD cycle, cause long-term health effects, and change how society views disabilities and parents who choose to raise children with disabilities. Even though today's society is almost purely about beauty and perfection, parents choosing the genes of their child are harming the long-term life of the child because PGD reduces the individuality of a child and the cost of a PGD cycle is tremendous and cannot be guaranteed to be successful (K...
... middle of paper ...
...dure because they believe that an embryo is a living human being. If an embryo is defective, it is discarded, and to many that is equivalent to an abortion. Is this cycle really lowering the abortion numbers, or just making it less painful to the parents because they have many more embryos waiting for their turn?
Works Cited
Kearns, William. "PGD Improves Chances for Successful Pregnancy and Birth." Preimplantation Genetics. Web. 2 Dec 2009. .
Stone, Gigi. "Fertility Doctor Will Let Parents Build Their Own Babies." Health. 02 Dec 2009. ABC News Internet Ventures, Web. 3 Dec 2009. .
Wheeler, Tracy. "Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis." Huntington's Disease Lighthouse. 25 Sep 2009. Web. 5 Dec 2009. .
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...
The addition of a child into a family’s home is a happy occasion. Unfortunately, some families are unable to have a child due to unforeseen problems, and they must pursue other means than natural pregnancy. Some couples adopt and other couples follow a different path; they utilize in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood. The process is complicated, unreliable, but ultimately can give the parents the gift of a child they otherwise could not have had. At the same time, as the process becomes more and more advanced and scientists are able to predict the outcome of the technique, the choice of what child is born is placed in the hands of the parents. Instead of waiting to see if the child had the mother’s eyes, the father’s hair or Grandma’s heart problem, the parents and doctors can select the best eggs and the best sperm to create the perfect child. Many see the rise of in vitro fertilization as the second coming of the Eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. A process that is able to bring joy to so many parents is also seen as deciding who is able to reproduce and what child is worthy of birthing.
In recent years, great advancement has been made in medicine and technology. Advanced technologies in reproduction have allowed doctors and parents the ability to screen for genetic disorders (Suter, 2007). Through preimplantation genetic diagnosis, prospective parents undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) can now have their embryo tested for genetic defects and reduce the chance of the child being born with a genetic disorder (Suter, 2007). This type of technology can open the door and possibility to enhance desirable traits and characteristics in their child. Parents can possibly choose the sex, hair color and eyes or stature. This possibility of selecting desirable traits opens a new world of possible designer babies (Mahoney,
The advancement and continued developments of third-party assisted reproductive medical practices has allowed many prospective parents, regardless of their marital status, age, or sexual orientation, to have a new opportunity for genetically or biologically connected children. With these developments come a number of rather complex ethical issues and ongoing discussions regarding assisted reproduction within our society today. These issues include the use of reproductive drugs, gestational services such as surrogacy as well as the rights of those seeking these drugs and services and the responsibilities of the professionals who offer and practice these services.
For just thousands of dollars more, women going through in vitro fertilization can later choose to have a certain gender with perfect vision, a great heart, a natural ability for sports, and being able to avoid diseases (Angelle). Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis was first inaugurated in 1990. “It has become an important complement to the presently available approaches for prevention of genetic disorders and an established clinical option in reproductive medicine” (Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis). This has come in handy because it gives you the opportunity to create a baby free of health risks and you are able to freeze your eggs if you miscarry or if something harmful goes wrong with the first egg. Designer babies are created using In Vitro Fertilization. Using this technique, doctors can fertilize the egg with sperm inside the laboratory using a test tube. Doing so you can reduce the chance of the child being born with a genetic disorder and the parents can actually then on choose the sex of the baby. In some cases couples have used PGD to their advantage to save one of their children. Some babies sole purpose is to be created to save the life of their own sibling. Jamie was the first “designer” baby in Britain. “He was genetically matched to his four-year-old brother, Charlie, in the hope to curing a rare type of anaemia which threatens the older boy...
In the present day there are new forms of technology being developed on a regular basis that make what was once impossible a normal reality. With this being said, many individuals throw caution to the wind and decide to take action on their every want and need. When it comes to the process of procreating and bringing a child into this world, parents can find themselves hoping and wishing for one gender over another. In order to ensure that the gender they want is what they get parents can go through variations of processes in order to select the desired gender of their baby. Many in today’s world have deemed these sorts of practices unethical and immoral and some forms of religion refuse the idea of it. Ideas centered around selecting the gender of ones offspring has been a constantly ascending issue due to the fact that it clashes between the parents wishes and what is right for the world and the natural process. Going through with gender selection processes poses the threat that the offspring will simply be mediums of their parents desires rather than the child they were meant to be. This could jump-start a trend in the direction of both good and bad selection of unborn babies features and characteristics (Robertson 3). Selecting the gender of ones unborn baby for nonmedical reasons is unethical and immoral due to discarding unwanted eggs, discrepancies regarding religion, gender bias selections and instability, and the overall disruption of the natural processes for our future generations development.
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.
Over 40 years ago, two men by the names of James Watson and Francis Crick discovered deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA. DNA is hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms (What is DNA?). From this finding, gene therapy evolved. Today, researchers are able to isolate certain specific genes, repair them, and use them to help cure diseases such as cystic fibrosis and hemophilia. However, as great as this sounds, there are numerous ethical and scientific issues that will arise because of religion and safety.
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).
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.
The Human Genome Project is the largest scientific endeavor undertaken since the Manhattan Project, and, as with the Manhattan Project, the completion of the Human Genome Project has brought to surface many moral and ethical issues concerning the use of the knowledge gained from the project. Although genetic tests for certain diseases have been available for 15 years (Ridley, 1999), the completion of the Human Genome Project will certainly lead to an exponential increase in the number of genetic tests available. Therefore, before genetic testing becomes a routine part of a visit to a doctor's office, the two main questions at the heart of the controversy surrounding genetic testing must be addressed: When should genetic testing be used? And who should have access to the results of genetic tests? As I intend to show, genetic tests should only be used for treatable diseases, and individuals should have the freedom to decide who has access to their test results.
Genetic engineering gives the power to change many aspects of nature and could result in a lot of life-saving and preventative treatments. Today, scientists have a greater understanding of genetics and its role in living organisms. However, if this power is misused, the damage could be very great. Therefore, although genetic engineering is a field that should be explored, it needs to be strictly regulated and tested before being put into widespread use. Genetic engineering has also, opened the door way to biological solutions for world problems, as well as aid for body malfunctions. I think that scientists should indeed stop making genetic engineering for humans, because it will soon prove to be devastating to the human race. It would cause rivalries and tension among different kinds of genetically engineered humans for dominance and power.
Prenatal genetic screening in particular is a polarizing topic of discussion, more specifically, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD is one of the two techniques commonly used to genetically screen embryos in vitro; it is usually done at the eight-cell stage of division. PGD is most often performed when there is the risk that one or both parents carry disease-causing mutations. It is extensively used by high-risk individuals trying to conceive babes who will be free of particular mutations. PGD can test for over 50 genetic conditions and even allows for sex selection if there are underlying gender-associated medical conditions. When the results are satisfactory, the selected embryo is implanted into the mother’s uterus. While a controversial technique, preimplantation genetic diagnosis is one example of some of the good genetic testing can do, more benefits will be furthe...
The Problem Genetic engineering has been around since the 1960’s, although major experiments have not been really noticed until the 1990’s. Science comes in different forms, the two major being cloning and genetic reconstruction. Cloning is the duplicating of one organism and making an exact copy. For example, in 1996 the creation of the clone sheep named Dolly, the first mammal to be cloned, which was a great achievement. The other form, genetic reconstruction, is used to replace genes within humans to help or enhance the life of an unborn child for a medical reason or just for the preference of a parent.