Three Parent Birthing Analysis

We are living is a world where very soon it will be possible for people to create ‘designer babies’ that have all the features they wish for. In the article Building Baby from the Genes Up, Ronald M. Green talks about all the positive impacts that genetic modification of human beings can have on our future generations. Green acknowledges some of the negatives such as parents creating perfect children and being able to give them any trait the parent wants. However in the end he comes to the conclusion that the positive impacts of getting rid of genes that cause obesity, cancer, learning disorders, and many other diseases and disorders, outweighs the negative aspects. Richard Hayes, author of Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks, takes the stance that we should not be able to change anything about human beings through genetic modification. He believes that once we start modifying a few features, it will slowly turn into every parent altering as many of their babies’ genes that they want. While he does acknowledge the positive impacts of getting rid of negative genes such as Tay-Sachs, he believes that it is not worth the risk of having parents manipulate all their future children’s genes to their liking. Green and Hayes stand on opposite sides of the debate about genetic modification of human beings and this essay will explore the similarities and the differences of their articles.

Throughout our lifetime we are in constant change, many of those changes are ones that you don’t notice. However permanent we set a change to ourselves, one thing we hardly notice change is our DNA. Just growing recently in popularity is genetic engineering , along with its immense potential which can do very much for us, in the future and today. However, with all the potential that genetic engineering carries many people have begun to resent what genetic engineering could become instead of focusing on the great capabilities, and what lies ahead of its bright future. Regardless of what others believe, Genetic engineering will renovate the way we do things today, genetic engineering is a tremendous step to accept, and without a doubt a step

Explanation: This is because in this case the procedure would be attempting to save the baby from ever contracting cancer and though the procedure would likely to have its own fair share of uncertain consequences it would thus be worth trying to save the baby from cancer and enable them have a long healthy life not threatened by cancer.

In the essay, titled "Building Baby from the Genes Up?" Ronald M. Green proclaims his approval of genetic selection and extraction of human genes. He gives reasons that support his outlook on the matter, that this will be useful to civilization. Ronald M. Green is in violation of several ethical codes, with his view on genetic modification. I am against genetically modified humans, and I will explain to you, why this is my stance on the subject. First, I will summarize exactly what Ronald M. Green says in his article about his view on genetic modification and why practicing it is vital. Second, I will describe research

Should human genetic modification be allowed in today’s society? Many experiments with genetic modification on plants and animals involved trial and error. While there was success in the research, there also existed the cost of many errors. Scientists soon want to move onto the next step – genetic modification in humans. The human aesthetic could soon be in the hands of men. Recent advances in technology and research through other life forms have allowed us to consider this vast advancement in genetic modification. In studies of genetic modification, scientists rarely have 100% efficiency. We need to approach the concept of genetic modification in humans with caution. The magnitude of the advancement is immense; therefore, we need to approach this concept at a gradual pace. If we ignore these precautions, we risk human lives and deformities in the name of science. Exploring the possibilities of genetic modification is important to the future of science.

Scientist are researching genetic modification for many reasons. Some people think we are not good enough the way we are, and want to create a ‘perfect’ person. We have been given the ability to learn how to heal sickness and fix wounds with science. However, we have a responsibility to use this information wisely. We have been created with unique gifts and those gifts are important to the enhancement of life. Likewise, while researching about the Author of “The Perfect Stranger”, Amy Sterling Casil, I have discovered that she also has similar feelings about the gifts that we have all been given. We need to consider a few things as we review Casil’s story “The Perfect Stranger”. First, medical advancement is a great thing. Next, we need to make sure we are taking responsible steps while advancing and not creating even more division in our society. And lastly, we need to make sure we don’t lose our diversity and unique qualities. Although, some people believe genetic modification is what we need to better the human race, in actuality genetic modification can be dangerous, because overstepping our boundaries will produce something that is no longer authentic or that is unable to relate on a genuine level.

Worryingly, there has been minimal public debate regarding this technology that could irreversibly alter the human race. Instead, ethical discourse has been largely contained to scientific and political circles. It is extremely problematic that a large majority of the general public is unaware of the research and debate regarding human gene modification. In addition, the current debate has stagnated, with researchers and politicians being unable to find any common ground. However, upon close examination of the three main ideological groups within this controversy, a key similarity becomes apparent: each group, regardless of whether they are proponents or opponents of human gene

Three-parent in vitro fertilization known as three-parent IVF has caused a huge controversial debate in today society. Doctors want to be able to help prevent an inheritable disease, which is caused by defective mitochondrial DNA that is serious and life-threatening. Women are in need of the three-parent IVF procedure so their child can come out healthy. United Mitochondrial Disease Foundation in Pittsburgh, “[explain] that between 1,000 and 4,000 children are born with mitochondrial disorders in the US each year” (Brittany Shoot). Three-parent IVF procedure should be approved for use in the United States, meaning doctors who are participating in this procedure would be able to help mothers who have genetic disorder to have children.

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.

The “three person babies” method is when a baby is created through an IVF, resulting in the child carrying genetic information from three different people. One major ethical concern about this method is that it will alter the human germ line, especially since we don’t know how effective the technology is. This is such a major concern that even former President Obama signed into a law that prevents the modification of the human germline. Many people are afraid that the mitochondrial DNA will manipulate and change the nuclear DNA. Since mitochondrial disease is one of the most common results of being a “three person baby,” scientists are excited to see how new technology might be able to prevent mitochondrial disease.

While reading through articles on the internet and watching videos on the three-parent technique I believe that this type of technique is ethical, most of, many of moms in today’s society can’t have healthy baby’s due to inheritable mitochondrial that’s why they are doing the three-parent technique to create a healthy child, the good thing about this procedure is that 99% of DNA comes from the parent’s genes and only about 0.1% from the third donor and also IVF technique using mitochondrial replacement therapy has been revealed, giving hope to families with inheritable mitochondrial disorders that they may be able to have healthy children in the future. On an article, I read that to create a healthy birth was to move the DNA from an egg of

I think that the three parent fertility is not a good idea because the baby might not look like the parent or the baby could even die. Parents like to have some sort of their trait in the baby.

This might sound all fun and stuff of science fiction, but in all honesty scares a lot of people. This method has many benefits of treating and curing diseases, maybe even before they are expressed, but that’s not what scares people. What scares people is the thought of human applications, or test tube babies. Test tube babies are those children who undergo a procedure prenatal to express traits wanted by that of their parents. Many scientists don’t want this and have drafted legislation and training to prevent this. Although this technology is already being used any human benefits won’t be seen for another 20 years minimum.

A great advantage is that there is no third person DNA present and the entire process is done with the couple’s own egg and sperm.

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).