The Pros And Cons Of Genetic Engineering

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

For many people, the term “designer babies” sounds like something that could only exist in the novel, Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. But, science has now advanced to the point where faulty genes can now be singled out, discarded, and replaced with more favorable ones. Just like the 16,012 babies manufactured in the Hatchery and Conditioning Centre in Brave New World, human embryos can be selected for fertilization based on their genes. This is done through the processes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). This involves removing mature egg cells from a woman and fertilizing it with male sperm outside of the body. The embryos are then analyzed for abnormalities and mutations in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). The healthiest embryos are then implanted back into the woman’s uterus for regular gestation (Yount). The development of these techniques originated from the Human Genome Project initiated by the United States government in 1988 (Siegel-Itzkovich). Although established initially with the purpose of selecting healthy embryos free of disease, the same techniques can be applied to select genes that code for traits such as intelligence, strength, and beauty. IVF and PGD are useful techniques but should only be used for medical purposes, not for selecting the embryos of perfect children.

Science and technology are always pushing forward and leading us to new discoveries, dramatically altering life as we know it. One of the newest discoveries is the genetic enhancement of infants, also known as designer babies or germline enhancement. Scientists take the human embryo and enhance its genetic makeup to ensure a particular gene is present or to remove the gene altogether. The manipulation of the unborn child’s genes will pose unknown risks and will be done without their consent. The controversy of this deception will further destabilize society and its unity. The genetic enhancement of infants should be opposed because it is unethical and dangerous to civilians and society.

A designer baby is a baby genetically engineered in vitro for specially selected traits, which can vary from lowered disease-risk to gender selection. Before the advent of genetic engineering and in vitro fertilization (IVF), designer babies were primarily a science fiction concept. However, the rapid advancement of technology before and after the turn of the twenty-first century makes designer babies an increasingly real possibility. As a result, designer babies have become an important topic in bioethical debates, and in 2004 the term “designer baby” even became an official entry in the Oxford English Dictionary. Designer babies represent an area within embryology that has not yet become a practical reality, but nonetheless draws out ethical concerns about whether or not it will become necessary to implement

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

In society, newly introduced ideas and morals are viewed upon with mixed feelings, including the process of genetic modification, which has yet to prosper or to crumple. The topic of genetic modification is introduced and detailed upon within the articles “Expert Groups Says Embryo Genetic Modification Should Be Allowed” by Will Dunham and “UK Scientists Seek Permission to Genetically Modify Human Embryos” by Ian Sample. They delve upon the idea that the process of genetic modification can be appropriately used in which to prevent certain unnecessary and unwanted diseases from developing, ultimately saving lives, and can provide further insight for human development. Additionally, they discuss the point that genetic modification is still at

Over the past decade, the scientific technology of genetic engineering has grown drastically. Online articles propose that the chance to pick the accurate characteristics a guardian wants for their child will be accessible, “Any couple with several thousand dollars to spare can choose the sex of their offspring” (Ehrich and Williams, 2004). Progressed regenerative advances permit people and specialists to screen embryos for a hereditary issue and select solid developing lives. Although Designer babies have been a subject that has been banned in China, UK, and India, it is still a mainstream point far and wide. This subject brings a considerable measure of verbal confrontations about the basic, yes and no, but additionally about when and when not.

The term designer children is unnerving at first to many. The idea of parents designing the genetic makeup of their offspring makes children seem like a commodity in a genetic free market. Thoughts of a dystopian society like the one in the film “Gattaca” come to mind. However, taking an immediate repugnant stand against genetic enhancement is not well-founded. A more open-minded inspection of the issue reveals that the idea of parents improving their children’s life prospects through genetic engineering (provided it is safe) is, at its core, not unethical. In fact, some genetic enhancement in addition to correcting deleterious genes to prevent disease is a moral obligation. It is moral to make rational decisions using the science and

An article called “In Praise of Designer Babies” ( October 10, 2013) was constructed by Paul Waldman, a columnist and senior writer for the magazine “The American Prospect” for which this article was published in. This magazine covers various topics from a liberal and progressive perspective. Within this source, Waldman claims that the future of Designer Babies may not be as unethical as some people make it out to be, and that society may truly want the potential of genetically modifying their kids more than they think. To fully support his argument, Waldman refutes some of the most prominent ethical arguments with his own thinking about genetically modified embryos as well as what he believes society’s true opinion about designer babies are.

Is this process ethical? These questions greatly arose when for the first time in America; human genes were intentionally altered in preparation for a specific characteristic to be displayed within a child. In 2000, the first designer baby was created through the process of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and it created great upheaval and praise within the community. According to CBS News, Molly Nash, a 6 year old girl inherited a rare disease from her parents called Fanconi Anemia. With this disease, Molly’s life was definitely soon to come to an end with no means of a donor available. As concerned parents would be, Lisa and John Nash wanted to do anything they could to ensure that their daughter survived. With no other options available, PGD was the last attempt to a means of survival for their daughter. After going through many test tube screening, on October 20, 2000, Adam Nash was born. Adam Nash was genetically selected with genes that matched the tissue for his older sister to survive. Once Adam was born, his blood from his umbilical cord was transplanted into Molly’s bone marrow and he saved his sister’s life.

Genetic modification, especially the production of “designer babies,” has been acclaimed as the next great medical beneficiary to humanity, and also regarded with disdain and fear as a product of man playing god, neo-eugenics, and perpetuating inequality. The benefits to society, such as alleviating medical anomalies and bettering both length and quality of life, outweigh the moral panic and outcry that is a response to scenarios that are unlikely to ever even develop. Society should embrace genetic engineering and modification to improve humanity as a whole.

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.

Genetic engineering is known for it controversial issues such as playing God yet the media has been keen on sugar coating the benefits on new genetic innovations. People have glossed over the dangers that it is providing toward inequalities in society. Although Genetic engineering can benefit to those in the lower class to an extent, the Government needs to limit the potential inequalities genetic modification is doing toward society.

Should parent be allowed to genetically engineer their children? : The ethical dilemma of designer babies.

Many of the ethical dilemmas that exist today will most likely be exacerbated when the technology for genetic sequencing becomes mainstream. Controversial topics like abortion and LGBT rights, which haven’t even been fully resolved in modern society, will re-emerge in a new light, as it becomes easier to test for diseases and other characteristics of an unborn child.