Genetically Modified Babies Research Paper

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

Gina Kolata’s article, Ethics Questions Arise as Genetic Testing of Embryos Increases (2014), explains that as the increase of the testing of embryos for parents to choose whether or not to have children has also brought its ethical questions in the light. Kolata uses the Kalinskys case, a family in the article, and how their neurological disease, Gerstmann-Straussler-Schinker (GSS), has raised questions for ethicists who have looked into the case. Kolata’s purpose in writing this article is to inform the audience on the growing topic of embryo testing and also the ethical question that also accompany in order to have the audience to develop a personal view on the issue. Given how the author explains the technical terms used within the article, Kolata is writing to an audience that is not fully aware of genetic testing.

Is this the child that you have envisioned in your future? Or maybe did you see your child with brown eyes rather than blue? Maybe more intellectually gifted? Or with the promise of performing well in sport?

Human genetic engineering and eugenics have been a largely controversial topic over the past decades. Eugenics can be popularly defined as the science of improving and enhancing a human population or person through manipulating the human genes, selective breeding, and sterilization. The end goal and desired result of eugenics is to basically create a human race or people with more desirable biological, physical, or psychological traits. Eugenics and genetic modification is a current, pressing subject; in April 2015, a group of Chinese researchers, used a new gene-editing technology, called CRISPR to “[tinker] with the genomes of human embryos” (Adams). Presently, according to CQ Researcher, “New genetic technologies allow scientists to delete a mutant gene and insert a healthy one, which…has the potential to eliminate inherited diseases, such as cystic fibrosis.” However, these techniques have only been used on embryos belonging to laboratory animals. The big question here is whether or not science and technology are crossing an ethical boundary by using these techniques and performing genetic modification on human embryos. Do humans have the right to “play God” and alter nature?

Another concern towards mitochondrial replacement is the health and welfare of future children and the potential short- and long-term harms to them and their offspring, when it comes to germline intervention. In the church, it teaches “Because the risks connected to any genetic manipulation are considerable and as yet not fully controllable, in the present state of research, it is not morally permissible to act in a way that may cause possible harm to the resulting progeny” (Jones 131). As with many assisted reproductive techniques, because germline effects are inherited by future

However, the issue arises when the parent uses prenatal genetic screening for the purpose of aborting a pregnancy or terminating an embryo fertilized in vitro. Instead of using technology to be informed and prepare the best possible life for a possible child, the parents are choosing whether or not to allow the life of the possible child to exist.

However an advancement in technology before the turn of twenty- first century makes designer babies a real possibility, staates, Sarah Ly Keywords. This article shows that designer babies have created controversy about whether it's ethical or unethical and on whether it is necessary to implement limitations regarding designer babies in the future. Like I said before, PGD allows viable embryos to be screened for various genetic traits, such as sex-linked diseases. Furthermore, this article proves that people may use PGD for a different reason. For example, this article explains about a couple who already had conceive two boys, but they wanted a girl.

Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis is a technology that “has steadily expanded its scope, often in contentious ways. Embryo screening, for example, is sometimes used to create a “savior sibling”-- a younger sister or brother whose healthy cells can be harvested to treat an older sibling with serious illness, It is also increasingly used to weed out embryos at risk of genetic diseases” (Robinson). After awhile of using PGD to help a child or make sure nothing was to happen to a child they realized that the could even change the appearances of children. By doing this they take away racial diversity and end up making the world have genetic consequences. By letting this happen this means the world would be okay with only having a few races and children who are either made without being genetically engineered or being genetically engineered and feel like they are a better

The article “Three-parent babies: the argument for and against” written by Sarah Knapton states due the fact that the new technique called mitochondrial transfer can modify slightly the genome of next births, many opinions a favor and against of this method have been raised by ethical concerns. One of the argument a favor to the mitochondrial transfer is that it can benefit more than 2,500 mothers and 150 births a year. How the mitochondrial inheritance is through the mother, the transfer of mitochondria prevents of passing abnormal genes to the next generation in order to avoid mortal diseases, and the mitochondrial DNA is not more than 0.054 percentage without the nucleus of the cell. On the other hands, counter-arguments allege that children

Finally, my last reason why I do not support genetic engineering is because it will make some people enter a bad emotional state. In the movie GATTACA,when a person was perfect, but then later found out he had mistakes they would enter a suicidal state of mind. This happens because the person thinks they’re perfect but when they realise they are not they think they’re a failure. If we start genetically modifying our children they could experience something similar to this. We should just let everyone be

Scientists have recently brought up the idea of genetically engineering humans, as if we are machines that need to be tinkered with. Genetic engineering is the deliberate modification of the DNA of an organism. We have seen this type of modification in the food that we have consumed and in the animals that many purchase. It has never been proven to be 100% safe for humans to consume genetically modified food as it is not from nature and our bodies do not know how to react. Also there have been many cases where purebred dogs have been susceptible to numerous diseases because of the decreased gene pool they were modified from, which is the cause of inbreeding. Scientists must never engineer humans because we have seen the bad effects it has had

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.

Determining if genetic engineering is morally good is only half the battle with this ethical issue. Regardless of whether morally good reasons are used to justify it, genetic engineering is an attempt to use human intelligence in order to try to overthrow God’s original creation or plan for humans. Scientist are trying to perfect his creation or change it. God has laid out the way things should happen naturally and humans are attempting to overthrow it. A key word to note is “attempt” because Scotus would see genetic engineering as a failed attempt at playing God because he believes that God is all powerful and it would be impossible for a human to possess that same type of power. In the article “Freedom Beyond Practice Reason: Duns Scotus on Will- Dependent Relations” the author Tobias Hoffmann discusses freedom of will according to Scotus. Hoffmann explains that, “for Scotus, the will is free to will any good either for its own sake alone… or for the sake of something else.” (Hoffmann 1077). God gave humans the freedom of will which allows individuals to live a life they choice. This means an individual could choice a life of virtue or a life of sin and God would not intentionally interfere in their life and force that individual to choose God’s preferred path of righteousness. God has given humans a choice, and permits them to do what they want with their own lives. Likewise, God has given humans intelligence and what humans do with their intelligence is also up to them

Approximately four million infants are brought into the world each year. Out of these 4 million three percent to four percent of the infants are born with a genetic condition, not including chromosomal abnormities(Inherited). What if there was a solution for the large number of sick infants brought into the world? A solution could be discovered if the government and the scientific organizations would allow experiments to come to life. Genetic engineering on human embryos has many benefits and if the scientific associations allowed for studies to progress, the world and the future generations could be changed forever. Genetic testing on healthy human embryos should regulated; however, the possibilities deserve the right to be studied.