The Right to Choose

One field of genetic science which is crucial in society today is medicine where cloning is now possible. The need for moral reasoning is essential in this field because with greater power society must “[recognize] not only the limits of our knowledge but also our vulnerability to being misguided” with an evolving world (Dalai Lama 140). Humans have kept high moral responsibilities over the century when faced with new developments in knowledge. The Dalai Lama suggests that “our technological capacity has reached a critical point” during the past decade and the gap between knowledge and human ethics when making decisions has grown farther apart as new biogenetic science has arose (133). The issue is not whether

Gregory Stock, in his article Choosing Our Genes, asserts that at this point not ethics are important, but rather the future of genetic technology. Stock supports his conclusion by providing powerful examples of how genetic modifications can benefit our population anywhere from correcting genes at the time of conception to extending lifespan. He wants to inform his audience about all of the benefits of genetic technology in order to prove that there are way more advantages in this technology that are highly desirable by people of different ages. He reaches his readers by writing a very detailed yet coherent article that brings awareness to various groups of people from parents to be to older populations.

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

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.

In chapter four of her book Genetic Dilemmas, Dena Davis asserts that it is unethical for parents to subject their children to genetic testing for the markers of adult-onset genetic diseases because it places an unfair constraint on a child’s right to an open future. It both removes the child’s ability to choose whether to be tested as an adult and has the potential to negatively alter the overall trajectory of their lives. While the current consensus amongst medical professionals is that such testing should be prohibited (Davis, _____), many concerned parents correctly point out that discouraging such testing creates a conflict of interests between the “beneficence model of patient care and the rights of parents to their own autonomy”

An Enhanced Genotype: Ethical Issues Involved with Genetic Engineering and their Impact as Revealed by Brave New World

In the following, I will attempt to map out the current debate as it applies to genetic screening and testing, with special attention paid to the criticism offered by disability studies theory and disability rights advocates. I will begin with a brief overview of the traditional arguments in favor of reproductive liberty and a more permissive stance toward the use of genetic technology. This will include a discussion of autonomy as the underlying ethical principle at work, and the related focus on informed consent as both a guiding axiom and common target of criticism. The principle of beneficence is a crucial underlying

As a result of further advances in genetic testing, parents may be able to select embryos on the basis of particular desirable traits. Parents who want their child to be a mathematical prodigy, for example, may select the embryo on the basis of such desirable academic traits. This is where an ethical dilemma presents itself. Do parents have a right to choose embryos on the basis of non-medical traits? I believe the answer is no. While parents definitely influence the personality of their children and, in turn, their interests, deciding the genetic makeup of the child is a violation of the child’s

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.

Bioethical issues include life-prolonging treatments, organ transplantation, medical physician-assisted suicide, abortion, new reproductive technologies, and recent advances in genetics diagnosis and therapy. Such issues often prove to be controversial and can leave us questioning a lot. New medical treatments and technologies often do not come with sufficient precedents to guide our moral reasoning where the life of a woman is in danger. Illegal abortions are common worldwide and carry a high risk of complications, including severe bleeding, infertility, or death often occur. One of the most common reasons for abortions at the latter stage of pregnancy is detection that the fetus has a serious genetic defect. With currently approved technology, these procedures can only be done later in pregnancy. Another common reason is that the woman is young or in denial about her pregnancy, and does not seek an abortion until she is unable to hide it.

Humans have been able to genetically modify crops, food, and animals over the years with many regulations. Now, they are able to genetically select/modify babies with the rapidly advancing technology that is available. Until recently, parents did not have the option to choose how their child will look and the many genetic features that their child must have. Genetically modified babies (GMB) are commonly referred to as designer babies. Designer babies’ genetic makeup is “selected in order to eradicate a particular defect or to ensure that a particular gene is present” (Catalano, 2012). Although the purpose for genetically modifying the fetus is to eradicate diseases many nowadays use it to alter physical genes such as eye color and hair color which is an abuse of the technology. This has caused a debates regarding whether or not GMBs are ethical and if the United

Medical professionals today can screen for certain genetic traits (genetic diseases and sex) with in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis to obtain a healthy child, and reproductive technology continues to improve. With this in mind, the question arises whether sex selection is ethical. Julian Savulescu, Uehiro Professor of Practical Ethics at Oxford University, argues that sex selection is moral, based on his ethical principle of Procreative Beneficence: that “couples (or single reproducers) should select the child, of the possible children they could have, who is expected to have the best life, or at least as good a life as the others, based on the relevant, available information” [Savulescu 1]. Savulescu claims

Every human has rights. But how far can a human push their rights into science with choosing the own genes of their child or do they even have the right to say and pick what their child may look like. Well, it looks like they do because a U.S. fertility clinic is offering parents to have made to order babies pretty much. Letting "...moms and dads pick whether junior has blue or brown eyes or black or blond hair" as if they were building their own toy (Salamone). Even the doctor who came up with it, Dr. Jeff Steinberg stated "genetic health is the wave of the future" and "it's already happening and it is not going to go away" (Salamone).We are already being led to a society with the idea of a flawless human being. However, other doctors are not warming up to this idea so fast. Some

On the most surface level, human genetic engineering and human genetic modification are a new and rapidly developing field of science that deals with directly altering the DNA (genetic makeup) of a living human cell. From early science fiction to the present day, taking control of humans’ gen es and directing the flow of evolution has been a subject of debate for many people. Human genetic engineering or HGE tends to bring up thoughts of dystopian futures where altering DNA has unexpectedly resulted in horrible mutant humans that can’t survive and thus the human race perishes, but this is not necessarily the outcome. Since genetic engineering is an emerging field of science, there are still many moral and ethical issues that need to be addressed before continuing research. Atheists and theists both have valid reasons to support / resist the continuation of this field of science. For the purpose of this paper, it will be assumed the reader has a reasonable understanding of the terms atheism, theism, DNA, genes, genome, and how a persons DNA (their genotype) essentially dictates the physical appearance and abilities that person portrays (their phenotype).

One thing that many people disagree upon is whether or not eugenics and genetic cloning is ethically right or wrong. On one hand, it could eliminate children being born with life threatening diseases by forewarning parents of potential medical problems. “It is known that hemophilia, albinism, and certain structural abnormalities are inheritable. Family gene maps, called pedigrees, can help families with serious diseases avoid having children with the same diseases through genetic counseling, and, increasingly, prospective parents can be tested directly for the presence of undesired genes.” (Prothero)