Purdy's Argumentative Analysis

Though the use of pre-natal hereditary screening is as of now utilized as a part of high-hazard pregnancies for recognition of illness, for example, Down syndrome and Huntington 's chorea (Ridley 55, 98). As researchers decide the qualities for extra hereditary conditions, screening of incipient organisms will give more data to potential biological parents, former to their offspring has advanced. On the off chance that a screened embryo were found to convey qualities for a specific malady or inability, its guardians may specifically prematurely end it. This gives parents a choice of raising a child with a disability or back out if they don’t have the means to support the child financially, physically, emotionally or mentally. This is a good thing despite what others say because if a child is born with a disability in to family that doesn’t have the means to support it, it is unfair to all parties

When parents know the fetus is “special”, they may be chosen to terminate the pregnancy. Thus, in general prenatal screening helps to detect congenital disabilities but is also thought to be the 'remedy' selective abortion (Seller, 1976).

1. Laura Purdy argues against having children if there is a 50 percent chance that the child will have a genetic disease like Huntington Disease, unless the parents go for prenatal screening and will have an abortion if the test comes back positive that the child has the disease. One reason why she believes this is because the child deserves to have a full, happy, healthy life like other healthy children. She believes that the child will not have a normal life like most children. For instance in accordance with Huntington Disease, the child will be filled with anxiety of potentially getting the disease and being in constant fear to when the disease will take its course.

A Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a test that “allows future parents to detect genetic defects that cause inherited disease in human embryos before they are implanted.” One of the most ethical questions that one might ask before considering the PGD is whether the benefits of genetic knowledge outweigh harmful effects that occur to the embryo? Is it really worth manipulating embryos genes in order to achieve the desire of the parents? Often times we have to take into considerations the risk and benefits of each situation. I believe that the PGD test should be only be done to detect genetic defects, but it should not be used to manipulate genes in order to make what to them is a “perfect” child. As stated in our text, “ In the united Kingdom alteration of an embryos genes, even for gene therapy or cloning embryos is illegal.” By manipulating genes its like going against Gods wishes. In the eyes of God every person that comes into this world is equally seen as a human being because they are all created in “ the image of God.” In this case the parents should not be allowed to manipulate the genes of their unborn child just to accommodate to their

A moral justification for genetic treatment is only as accurate as the justification of disease. In the realms of objective science and the use of genetic testing, Kitcher argues that the basis for terminating a pregnancy due to a severe syndrome can also lead to the basis for termination due to an undesired sex or possibly even homosexuality. Ultimately, Kitcher supports only a minimalist approach to the use of

Darnovsky suggests that although many genetic scientists support germline engineering because it can potentially resist transfer of hereditary mutations, these scientists fail to mention that preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) does the same effect in allowing a technician to screen embryos for traces of diseases and simply deliver any non-infected embryos to the mother’s body. In conjunction, Darnovsky endorses the alternative of prenatal screening with the option of abortion to avoid the use of in vitro fertilization. Cohan, however, observes that it would dubious for the Court to restrict a woman’s reproductive rights to use germline technology while people are already using reproductive technologies such as in vitro fertilization, artificial insemination, and surrogacy. He asserts that the right to use these reproductive technologies is protected by law, and implies that it would be hypocritical for the government to restrict use of germline technology while these other reproductive technologies are still in effect.

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.

Mr Campbell Newman was a popular lord mayor as a member of the Liberal Party, who served the Queensland government for three years from 2012 – 2015 (Lewis, 2015). In the recent 2015 Queensland state election, Newman was heavily punished by the public voters of Queensland as a result of treating the public servants unfairly by cutting jobs in contrast to his promises. He also claimed that there would be no forced redundancies and that he would try to lower the unemployment rate, yet these promises were never met. In support of this, the following essay argues that Campbell Newman didn’t interfere with the free market economy of Queensland, which can be beneficial for consumers in many ways because there is no government intervention. Instead,

In 2011, Jennifer Connell was attending her nephew, Sean, 8th birthday party, Connell walks into the backyard and upon seeing his aunt, Sean runs and jumps to hug her. Causing Connell to fall backwards landing on the ground and breaking her wrist in the process. Instead of doing something rash, like, accepting he is eight and it was an accident since the laws of physics are not clear to him yet, she did the rational thing. She filed a lawsuit - against the nephew. She claimed that the nephew had been "careless" and wanted $127,000 for emotional suffering and medical bills. In her claim she stated that she had recently attended a party and her inability to hold her "hors d'oeuvres plate was distressing and embarrassing. Deliberation lasted a mere twenty minutes. The jury awarded Jennifer Connell nothing.

Ever since the beginning, slavery has always been a growing conflict in the United States. However in the 1800s, it became such a problem that it nearly separated the whole country. Those that lived in southern states believed that they had the rights to own slaves. They argued that the slavery made up a fairly large part of their economy because slaves labor was cheap. This is why many of the big time planters were rich. Also, they felt African Americans were unfit to survive on their own. Northern citizens felt that there was no need for slavery and that it was wrong. But who is right regarding this situation. It all depends on the individual. The back and forth arguing between the north and south was intense, neither backing down from the

As a complete supporter of Matt Ryan, the NFL and high school sports, the Pep Ralley performed on Friday for all three of those did not fully achieve its goals. First off having superstar athlete like Matt Ryan attend such a small school like ours is greatly an honor and should be celebrated. Penn Charter Football has struggled in the past years and having such an amazing athlete represent our high school sports is insanely positive for our program. When given the chance to show off our athletic skills though, the school decides to place the band geeks front and center on live national television when they do not even play during our football games. Instead the football teams and captains should have been front and center. They should have

Within his paper, Implications of Prenatal a Diagnosis for the Human Right to Life, Leo R. Kass ventures into the reasoning and consequences behind abortion due to genetic defects. The paper begins with the need for justification as to whether abortion is chosen or not. No matter what the decision there will always be an expectation for a given answer, whether a woman chooses abortion or not society will almost as if require reasoning behind the decision. Despite the opinions and differences between people, the expectation of reasoning remains constant. Not only does Kass explain that there is a need for justification, he also provides specific justifications commonly used and defended. Although it has been extensively proven that abortion cannot be justified by claiming that the fetus is merely a part

Within the pro-choice world there are many issues that are discussed like abortion, the instant where life begins and the use of contraceptives. This article will focus on not only the issue of using of contraceptives, but specifically the distribution of oral contraceptives (“the pill”) to teenage girls without their parent’s consent.

However, while all of these reasons might be valid to some parents, they are always people who oppose these modern technologies. Hilary Freeman disagrees. She feels parents would want to be able to choose merely for social reasons. Plus, she values the ideal that “babies are not commodities. They are not born to satisfy our desires or dreams and we cannot dispose of them if they don’t meet our requirements” (2). She feels that there is one and only one condition in which the parents should be able to choose; and this is on the basis of medicinal purposes. If the child is likely to inherit genes for a condition which is harmful to them such as hemophilia or muscular dystrophy. She also adds that wanting a balanced family is a shallow concept. She doesn’t agree with it, or see any value in it.

Waite and Gallagher also discuss the benefits that marriage gives to couples. Including the financial benefits, in that through specialization and by sharing incomes getting married boosts standard of living by thirty percent and this benefit is not incurred by cohabitating, as those who cohabitate do not share as much and are less committed to the wellbeing of their partner. In addition to the financial benefits, they also discuss the emotional benefits of knowing you have someone who loves you and who would take care of you. Children similarly benefit from having married parents as there are more financial resources available to help take care of them and they get to spend more time with at least one parent.