The Future of Designer Babies Since the time Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) was discovered, genetic modification has been a topic of discussion. One discovery leads to the next, from fertilization by sperm Injection to freeze-banking of embryos and postmenopausal motherhood to genetic tests for embryos and transgenic animals. The term "designer baby" simply means, designing a baby by picking out the baby's eyes, gender, hair color, height, personality, etc.It refers to the concept of isolating human embryos from willing donors, and allowing individuals to select from those embryos based on whichever nest have the most desirable genes or traits.
That means that people can choose their baby's sex, appearance, intelligence, longevity, and many personality traits. Children should not be treated like a product. People shouldn't play God and create their own perfect baby, and when it's not as perfect as they wanted it to be, Just simply throw it out, or instead of making a perfect baby, make a baby that has a disability. Designer babies could lead to the further division of the socioeconomic strata.Designer babies have come to become a huge question, whether it's a good thing or a bad thing.
Children should not be treated Like a product. Every parent wants his or her child to be special or perfect In his or her own way, but that Is why the parents should make a baby that Is put together through their genes, and not someone else's genes. The process of designing a baby to the parent's specification is called "germ line engineering". This means that the parents could pick out all the child's characteristics including skin color, ears, nose, feet. This technology helps people pick the genes they want for the future to-be-child.
In the article Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations, Nicholas Agar wrote, "The embryos that do not fit the pacifications set by the parents will get thrown away" (Agar). If the embryos that had been thrown away were allowed to grow, they could have had long and fulfilled lives. However, by simply throwing out embryos that could have lived; the poor babies have lost their potential life. Hypothetically, a couple might choose a female embryo with blue eyes, dark hair, and a minimal chance of disease, and get a healthy daughter who Is blue eyed with dark hair who also had a terrible mean personality.
Because "personality genes" are difficult to interpret and understand the personalities of designer babies cannot be chosen for" (Agar). The parents who wanted the blue eyed, dark haired daughter may have accidentally passed up a sweet tempered blonde haired son. The doctors will try to fulfill the needs of the parents which cause lots of testing to happen with deferent embryos, and those embryos that do not match will get thrown away. If many embryos are going to be thrown away, they should not have been created in the first place.By creating a generation of genetically similar people, the human species loses its ability to adapt to changing environments. In the article The Designer Baby Business Violates Christian Principles Michael Poorer wrote, Furthermore, on moral grounds, whether It Is believed that humans evolved or were created by God, It Is wrong to try to perfect something that has been perfected over a large span of time or made by God" (Poorer).
The human race must stop trying to play designer babies are all about.The evolution of environment has spanned about two million years and has resulted in the types of people we see today, people who have imperfections and people who are very different from one another. "The Christian understanding of unconditional love and acceptance is the only answer to an otherwise narcissistic business" (Poorer). A large scale of organisms in a particular species is necessary for that to continue to be competitive with other species and be successful.
By creating a generation of similar people, the human species loses its ability to adapt to changing environments. A lesbian couple in the United States of America has attracted fierce criticism by deliberately having a deaf baby. In the article Lesbian Couple Have Deaf Baby by Choice, David Theater wrote, "In an unexpected twist to the pursuit of "designer" offspring, the couple, who are both deaf, said they had wanted a child that would be like themselves" (Theater). The four- month old boy, Gavin, is profoundly deaf in his left ear and has only residual hearing in his right.Sharon Duchesses and Candy McCullough, both in their ass, turned to a friend with five generations of deafness in his family after being turned away by a sperm bank which told them that donors with disabilities were screened out. In an interview with the Washington Post, the women claimed, "They would make better parents to a deaf child".
If designer babies will go used to make for children with debilities and more children suffer, designer babies should be banned in all countries and not only some.The couple believed they would be able to understand the child's development more thoroughly and offer better guidance, and said the choice was no different from opting for a certain gender. They also said they were part of a generation that viewed deafness not as a disability but as a cultural identity. Ms Duchesses, the biological mother of the baby boy, said, "It would be nice to have a deaf child who is the same as us.
I think that would be a wonderful experience. You know, if we can have that chance, why not take it? A hearing baby would be a blessing.A deaf baby would be a special blessing" (Duchesses). Doctors have warned the couple that Shaving's vestige of hearing in his right ear is likely to get worse and advised that the boy be fitted with a hearing aid to help him develop a basic understanding of speech. The parents declined, saying they would leave the choice to the boy when he gets older.
Every minute the little boy doesn't get help, will only make it worse for his hearing to get better. People will start abusing what the designer babies was meant to do, which is to stop all diseases from going on with generations.In the book Designer Babies John Bliss wrote, "Having a designer baby requires a argue sum of money, estimate of 18,000 dollars, to be invested, so that doctors can produce the ideal child for the parents with all the desirable characteristics and cosmetic appearances" (Bliss 56). Only the rich are able to afford the 'luxury' and 'freedom' to choose the features that they want their child to have and this could possibly lead to the invention of a flawless generation of perfect children that are not only born rich, but also have a superior advantage over the poorer people; be it in terms of physical attractiveness, fitness or even intelligence.
That kind of social stratification can be frightening. This would intensify the gap between the rich and the poor because the rich simply get richer and more powerful, while the poor non-medical reasons is not necessary for loving life and it is doubtful that those who could not afford it would get reimbursed by insurance companies" (Poorer). Thus, it would be more challenging and difficulty for poor people to get out of the rat race as they need to possess higher intelligence and greater abilities to overcome the power class of the designer babies.The idea of designer babies is currently a huge debate.
A parents loves their child no matter what, they shouldn't be able to pick out the hole appearance and personality traits of the baby. If people will be allowed to choose their children like any other product in the store, the world isn't going to be able to function properly. Children should not be treated like a shopping cart should pick out the products as you go along.People shouldn't have enough power to designer their own human being with custom characteristics.
Designer babies could lead to the further division of the socioeconomic strata. Designer babies are another way to define humans giving birth to robots that they consider their children.
