Essay on Gene Therapy

Imagine a world where having a baby was like looking through a menu at some fancy restaurant. Imagine being able to choose how a baby will look and act. As mind-boggling as it sounds, scientists and researchers came across an unbelievable discovery: it is possible to design and edit a baby however a person may like. Hanson asserts that personality, gender, appearance, intelligence, hair color, and height can be changed using technology that was originally used for animals (Hanson). These babies are called designer babies. Phillip Ball, a science writer, claims that it is possible to change the genetic makeup of an unborn baby using bio-technology. However, these changes can have more negative effects than positive. Although most countries have not legislated the use of genetic modification, studies have been done on human embryos in China (Ball).

To put it simply, an abortion is defined as, the intentional termination of a pregnancy most often preformed before the third trimester (within weeks 1-28). The controversy over abortions usually stems from the difficulty between individuals to agree on a set of conditions that would constitute ones’ decision, to abort as just. This issue is examined by many philosophers, particularly, Judith Thomson and Don Marquis. Both philosopher’s views loosely encompass the complex underlying beliefs of those who stand behind the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” arguments. Tomson and Marquis demonstrate the very distinctively different perspectives one could take on the issue. Don Marquis suggests that fetuses, being persons, possess the right to a “future like ours” and that it would be wrong to intentionally impede on “the life that I would have lived if I had lived out my natural lifespan” except for in “rare circumstances”. While, Tomson asserts that not all abortions are morally wrong, nor do they “violate the victim’s right to life”, and by having one that is in no way indicative that a fetus’s rights have been violated. Despite the fact that both philosophers present valid positions, and outline their key differences, Tomson goes far beyond Marquis’ efforts by illustrating that the way in which we view abortions ought to be redefined in order for one to maintain a clear perspective.

Although the intentions of genetically modifying DNA in human embryos is aimed to rid society of genetic defects, it is still essential that this scientific discovery remains ethical. In an article on NPR.org, Rob Stein describes an experiment that scientists have been conducting in which they modify human DNA in order to eliminate life threatening genetic diseases that could be passed on for generations (Stein). In Portland, at Oregon Health & Science University, Paula Amato, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology, explains “that their work is aimed at preventing terrible diseases, not creating genetically enhanced people...much more research is needed to confirm the technique is safe and effective before anyone tries to make a baby this way”(Stein). Because scientists like Amato realize their research is controversial, they are taking every precaution to assure what they are doing is morally correct, they are not intending to corrupt society. Although their intentions are good, it is their job to make sure their research is being used in an ethical way. If not, millions of people, who are already obsessed with the idea of perfection, will be able to do something about

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

Modern technologies are constantly advancing in a multitude of ways to the degree that scientists have gained enough knowledgeable about the human genome to be able to find specific genes during the embryonic stage of reproduction. Scientists have already begun to use this knowledge to allow parents the ability to select the sex of their child and screen for genetic diseases via preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) with in vitro fertilization (IVF). Sex-selection has already created world-wide discussion regarding the ethics of such a situation. However, scientists are now looking toward germline engineering which will essentially allow parents to select and alter genetic traits of their children before implantation of the embryo into

Technology is developing every day. The automobile was revolutionary, and then they introduced the plane. Cell phones can connect us with people around the world. Self-driving cars are in development today! Revolutionary inventions are the expectation nowadays, but a new discovery is sparking controversial questions in the science world. Is it acceptable to alter a baby’s genes to make it a better human? Genes are the instruction book of the body, and they determine everyone’s attributes and how people act in their environment (Medical News Today). Some people say that everyone is different for a reason, and others think customizing the genes of children was meant to happen. Altering an infant’s genes is acceptable to prevent hereditary diseases, but the line should be drawn at making an artificially smarter, stronger, or prettier human.

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.

Bringing unwanted children into this world, with the means of improper care and love is restraining the pursuit of happiness in these children. If us as humans don't have the ability to give a child a healthy life; then the point to bring them into this world is not useful and causes lots more problems that should have never erupted in the first place.

Have you ever asked yourself is it possible to pick and choose your kids characteristics and appearance? If you ever have thought about this topic it is called designer babies and the technology used to do this is called CRISPR. In 2015 scientists in China tried to modify human embryos so that they could edit the genes of the embryos.(OI) This test failed horribly with all 86 of the embryos dying.(OI) Many people hope that one day designer babies will be a thing. I disagree with genetically modifying humans because in the bible it states, “God made you perfectly in his own image.”

What if there was a future where having a child was as simple as selecting desirable genes out of a catalogue? A future where technology granted parents the ability to design and perfect their children. The notion of “Designer Babies” seems absurd; however the rapid development of technology and the potential of gene manipulation could make this a startling reality.

Science is now able to better improve human health and safety thanks to the advanced modern technology and medicine that are available. Yet with today's technology being implemented into science comes the questions of human morality, or bioethics. One of the bioethics debates is on the coined term “Designer babies”; on if or where society should draw the line on genetically altering our children before they are born. With the technology able to stop hereditary diseases, the scientific development’s are able to change the child’s “eye color, hair color, social intelligence, right down to whether or not your child would have a widow’s peak” before the child is born. From the options on choosing whether or not your child will look or act a certain

No more are the days of an parent in the waiting room, waiting to hear if there child is born with a disability, for a hefty fee the baby can be genetically altered to come out perfect in a sense. The wealthy can pick almost everything down to the hair and eye color, the time of uncertainty is over for those who are wealthy.

New technological advances and scientific methods continue to change the course of nature. One of the current controversial advances in science and technology is the use of genetically modified embryos in which the study exceeds stem cell research. Scientists have begun planning for research involving human embryos in the genetic modification field. Many technological developments are responsible for improving our living standards and even saving lives, but often such accomplishments have troubling cultural and moral ramifications (Reagan, 2015). We are already beyond the days in which virtually the only procreative option was for a man and a woman to conceive the old-fashioned way (Reagan, 2015). Genetic modification of human embryos can be perceived as a positive evolution in the medical process yet it is surrounded by controversy due to ethical processes. Because this form of genetic modification could affect later born children and their offspring, the protection of human subjects should be a priority in decisions about whether to proceed with such research (Dresser, 2004). The term Human Genetic Engineering was originally made public in 1970. During this time there were several methods biologists began to devise in order to better identify or isolate clone genes for manipulation in several species or mutating them in humans.

Therefore because according to Kantian ethics, the unborn are considered persons (Manninen, 2008), they deserve to be treated as such, with respect to their individual desires. As the unborn cannot make their desires known, from a deontological perspective it would be unethical to interfere with the child’s natural development.

With new technologies available everyday, it seems almost as if we can customize our children. Reproduction is no longer an outcome of random and inherited genes, but now it’s a process of creating the child that we want to have. Fertility clinics are in debate as to whether or not it is ethical to be able to determine the sex of our children. Some view this as a valid option, while others see it as another step down the road to designer babies. But how far is too far? That is a question that we can only answer for ourselves. While this article remains unbiased, we are able to form our own opinion after seeing the pros and cons of both sides.