Compare Fox's The Case for Animal Experimentation vs Darnovsky's Revisiting Sex Selection
1960 WordsJul 13, 20188 Pages
Fox's The Case for Animal Experimentation Chapter 2 and 3 and Darnovsky's "Revisiting
1. What is the challenge/problem presented in this article?
Darnovsky’s article explores the upcoming moral challenges that are tied to the renewed interest in marketing sex selection to parents. There are a myriad of ethical issues tied to the option of deciding the sex of one’s child that fall far outside the scope of the question “Are we playing God?” However, it is the implications of the option to decide the gender of a baby that are more profoundly disturbing. In a society where perfection in appearance and “brains” is already prized above all else, it seems unlikely that wealthy parents could resist the urge to guarantee…show more content…
Challenges to women’s rights concerning pregnancy are apparent everyday, but the issue of the strides made by disabled people as equal members of society will be further compromised by a society where a powerful elite can “phase out” Nature.
Genetic sex-selection also furthers the commodification of children and the commercialization of reproduction. It could lead to gender stereotyping, sexism, and open up the door to more human genetic engineering that could further the agenda of eugenicists and magnify inequality in a world that already struggles with extreme cases of social injustice.
The marketing of such technologies is equally unconscionable, showing pictures of smiling babies next to genetics and IVF (in-vitro fertilization) labs. Suddenly, a need is being creating where no problem existed before, namely the desirability of a
“balanced” family. Like desires for designer clothes, plastic surgery and behavior enhancing drugs, the market for sex-selection technologies must first be founded in the creation of a problem where none existed before. This non-medical procedure makes the creation of children like something you can buy in the store and just for the profit of doctors. Fox spends a great deal of effort in his article bringing up the ethical dimensions of the problem and dismissing these arguments as the flippant rhetoric of well-intentioned, yet confused, activists. These include the idea based on evolution that