Ethics of Genetic Engineering Essay

On the last years, genetic technology have been improving. The research carried out in this area are focused on the early diagnosis of diseases. Moreover, manipulation of genes in the future provides a critical tool for eliminating fatal diseases to humans. Also humans will be able to manipulate genes from birth. But the real question is although can be perform it, we allow it? Everything possible is ethically permissible? Some dramatic demonstrations of genetic modification have been made with mice and other animals, however, evidence in humans are generally considered outside the ethical boundaries. Gregory Stock, director of the Program on Medicine, Technology, and Society at UCLA and author of Redesigning Humans, in his article “Choosing Our Genes” (2012) argues the use of technology to change humans genetic in order to avoid imperfections or diseases. Stock shows genetic engineering as a very useful technology and that applying it on the future to humans, positive results they will gain. Stocks article is effective, since he gives good reasons why using genetic technology would provide several benefits that people wish to have.

Although this may be the case in many areas of people’s lives today, it is not always beneficial, or necessary. People may have trouble deciding whether messing with human genes and cells is ethical. Designing the “perfect child” in many parent’s eyes becomes a harsh question of reality. The concept of a parent’s unconditional love for their child is questioned because of the desire to make their child perfect. If genetically engineering humans becomes a dominant medical option, people could have the chance to create their child however they like: from physical appearances, genetically enhanced genes, and the possibility to decide what a child thinks and acts, parents have access to designing their entire child. Naturally, people could be creating a super-human. Issues between different races, and eventually creating new prejudices against genetically engineered humans may increase. People may not realize how expensive genetic screening is at first. With only the rich being able to “enhance” their children, another social issue might occur, giving the world another type of people to outcast.

How far would you go to save human lives and to progress society for those in need? The benefits of genetic engineering have shown to outweigh the ethical and environmental consequences associated within the field. Genetic Engineering has shown to provide major benefits in the field of medicine and agriculture but is faced with extreme criticism and backlash, specifically on the basis of ethics.

Why are humans stuck how they are? Why do some have lethal flaws? Why do theses flaws exist? The correct answer is they don’t have to: Human genetic engineering can solve some of theses lethal issues now and can solve more in the future. It can help the next generation experience what everyone strives to achieve. Human genetic engineering research should continue because it can save people's lives, improve human’s lives and improve the lives of the next generation of children.

There are many incurable diseases in the world that affect an organism’s way of living. Cystic Fibrosis, a disease with no known cure, affects 1 out of 3600 Canadian child’s digestive system and lungs, while a person with sickle cell anemia is only expected to live forty to sixty years. Both of these diseases are similar in the way that they are inherited genetically; they are passed on from parents to their children. Scientists are producing a way to help these people called Genetic Engineering. This is a way of modifying an organism’s genome to produce a more desirable trait by manually adding new DNA.

It is incredible to see how far genetic engineering has come. Humans, plants, and any living organism can now be manipulated. Scientists have found ways to change humans before they are even born. They can remove, add, or alter genes in the human genome. Making things possible that humans (even thirty years ago) would have never imagined. Richard Hayes claims in SuperSize Your Child? that genetic engineering needs to have limitations. That genetic engineering should be used for medical purposes, but not for “genetic modification that could open the door to high-tech eugenic engineering” (188). There is no doubt that genetic engineering can amount to great things, but without limits it could lead the human race into a future that no one

One of the questions that has recently plagued me has been that of which is about the genetic structuring of our offspring. I ask myself, will we able to choose the physical features our child? If so, do we as a society think this will be an ethical practice? Perhaps, scientifically, this might be entirely possible, but law will most likely restrict it. An article written by Frederic Golden helped me draw some understanding on this hot topic.

This same technique would also be able to be used for the development of a technology that could trade out inferior traits and replace them with superior traits. Each individual will all possess their own ideas as to what they consider to be an inferior verses a superior trait, however this can still be harmful to society. This technology leads to a concept known as designer babies in which individuals will be able to select for the traits that they consider desirable for their child (Steinbock, 2008). Ethical concerns have been raised that there can be the risk that the connection between parents and children will disappear if the genetics in the children are altered. Children would be considered a product of scientists and not descendants of their families (Issus and Ethics of Gene Therapy, n.d.). If Restriction Nuclease Mediated Recombination is used across the globe to eliminate genetic-based diseases, it may develop other uses that can be controversial to society, such as designing your child to have superior

There is no denying the argument that it would be incredibly useful to have the ability to control and manipulate embryos in order to prevent diseases. However although there would be possible benefits, it is believed by many, including myself, that this huge medical step would cause more harm than good. On top of this, the concept of screening to prevent genetic disorders also suggests that a person with a disorder is somehow inferior, less desirable or not equal. Coming from a family that has lost many to the heartbreaking disease of cancer, I would love to see humans advance to a point where things like this were no longer a part of life. However, in my opinion, genetic engineering is not the solution to this nor is it the way of the future. In the article “ Engineering the perfect baby,” Antonio Regaldo quotes Edward Lanphier who says, “There really isn’t a medical reason.

The next major leap for humanity is genetic engineering, the process in which different genes are removed and substituted for other, more affective, genes. Genetic engineering has the potential to eliminate thousands of diseases, mutations, and disabilities, saving millions of lives from death and/or suffering. I suggest that we use genetic engineering, but only as a prevention to disease or other mutation genes that will make the person suffer physically or emotionally. I most definitely do not intend that we use this fascinating technology for purposes such as making a person with perfect looks. Parents should be able to choose some of their child's genes, as outlined above, through genetic engineering, for ethical, economical, and social reasons.

We know have to technology to create genetically superior humans that are stronger and faster. We now have the technology to reduce or eliminate deleterious genes and encourages desirable or superior traits. Human genetic engineering is portrayed as threatening by many and it is scary to think of the possibility of using gene engineering harmfully. We could create humans that are resistant to poisonous gases or war fighting machines. While these harmful things could happen, it is important to focus on the positives. We could prevent a child from being born with a life threatening disease or provide a loving mother, who can not naturally reproduce, with a child. In their book, Population Wars, Caroline Greeven and Greg Graffin provide two possibilities of human existence, one being “the rough trajectory of our lives have already been set in motion before we are born, that some of us are dealt good hands and some bad” (Greeven and Graffin 2015). While Graffin and Greeven are not directly talking about evolution and human genetic engineering, their words represent the argument against human genetic engineering. Many argue that we should not tinker with something as serious as human genetics and refer to that as “playing God.” However, French existentialist, Jean-Paul Sartre claims, “Man is free, man is freedom” (Sartre) and we should use that freedom to better ourselves and our societies because it is unjust to infringe on a person’s freedom. Humans have control over how we use this technology and hopefully we will use it safely and responsibly to produce societies that prosper and

Genetic Engineering has been hailed as one of the greatest scientific developments of the 21st century. The argument above is one of many, posed to ask human beings to think about whether or not genetic engineering is morally and ethically right. By modifying genes and DNA or by introducing new genes into an embryo, organisms are given new, often beneficial,

Genetic engineering has become increasingly normalized in today’s society, and people are exposed to this technology now more than ever before. Most people are aware that food companies practice genetic engineering on their plants in order to design the most profitable crops, but it isn’t generally known that this same technology can be applied to humans. The concept of picking certain traits and characteristics of a human may appear desirable, but many risks and potential side effects may follow considering that it is unknown what genetic engineering could affect in future generations. Francis Fukuyama, an accomplished and distinguished professor of political economy and philosopher, conveys his concern that genetic engineering is developing at a surprisingly rapid rate. Within his book, Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, he claims that genetic engineering not only will potentially be detrimental for the human race, but due to the change in nature of human beings, such engineering will also result in significantly impacting government and politics. Although genetic engineering can be seen as a huge technological advancement that could potentially help millions, there are drastic negative effects and reasons for disapproving genetic engineering that are too important to be overlooked.

Humans have evolved so much that we now have the ability to speed up this process of evolution by using genetic engineering to our advantage. Genetic engineering is the process of manually adding new DNA to an organism. Indeed, there are people who say that genetic engineering is unethical or even harmful to a person’s body. However, I believe that genetic engineering has the potential for eradicating all disease and for creating superior human beings.

People say that the benefits of human genetic engineering can include completely wiping out genetic defects that can cause terminal illnesses, or other life altering conditions. This information however, is completely untrue. Just because a disease doesn’t seem to be present in hundreds, thousands, or even a whole generation of humans, doesn’t mean that the genetic defect is gone; it can always come back. On the other hand, parents seem to turn towards the option of creating a “spare part” child. A spare part child will