Attention Getter: Grab a seat, pick up your baby catalog and start choosing. Will you go for the black hair or blonde hair? Would you prefer tall or short? Funny or clever? Girl or boy? Do you want them to be a muscle-bound sports hero? Or a slender and intelligent book worm? Imagine a perfect world, were everyone was perfect and designed a certain way.
Audience Relevance: I am here to tell you why I am against genetically engineering babies. Genetic engineering, another name for it is designer babies. It’s where your parents can choose your eye color, hair color, height, weight, etc…
Credibility: In preparation for this speech I have done extensive research on the topic of designers babies.
Thesis: Genetically engineering babies are truly
…show more content…
Genetic Engineering could harm future generations, our society and us. Making babies and making sure their child won’t have any birth defects may lead to everyone being “perfect”, which is not the way the world is.
B. Humans can be engineered to live longer, live around the age 100 to 150 years old, to live a life without disorders, which may take a little longer from them to achieve this, but this may cause over population.
Main Point 2 A. How far should we be willing to go? Many people may think, why not extend our technology? Why not see what we could do in the future. They may want to hand pick out their children and have their child look or act like them. You may also say it could help prevent diseases.
B. I have to say to that, there is something’s we should do with our technology but making our babies “perfect” seems to be going too far. This could lead to more problems then curing diseases, messing with a person’s DNA is difficult to sort out, no one has the understanding of how DNA actually controls our behavior, or which gene is which. “Altering the genetic code of our offspring is no small
It was a summer day at Farrington Grove Elementary School when I heard the teacher exhorting the early history of my homestate in every word. My mind had begun to time travel. I could imagine the Indians roaming a dense woods hunting game. One day a foreign white man makes his way into the unconquered territory. It is an intense situation at this meeting between two very different peoples in the world that will forever determine the fate of our grand nation of the United States of America and the state of Indiana.
It is incredible to see how far genetic engineering has come. Humans, plants, and any living organism can now be manipulated. Scientists have found ways to change humans before they are even born. They can remove, add, or alter genes in the human genome. Making things possible that humans (even thirty years ago) would have never imagined. Richard Hayes claims in SuperSize Your Child? that genetic engineering needs to have limitations. That genetic engineering should be used for medical purposes, but not for “genetic modification that could open the door to high-tech eugenic engineering” (188). There is no doubt that genetic engineering can amount to great things, but without limits it could lead the human race into a future that no one
Should parent be allowed to genetically engineer their children? : The ethical dilemma of designer babies.
The altering of human genes could save lives. You could cure cystic fibrosis or alzheimer's. This would save the lives of many (Doc. 3). This technology could also give you children with specific traits of your choice. Also, this engineering can leave people painfree. This is not good because they can’t detect danger. As a plus side, scientists will eventually take the gene that causes this and help cure those with chronic long lasting pains (Doc. 2). This would make more people happy and healthy across the nation! Eventually we could go so far as to make a genetically engineered nation. As you can see, Genetic Engineering also could have a positive effect on
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.
Recently the world has turned its attention to a new development in science, cloning. Cloning is defined as “the process of producing a clone” (Dictionary.com). This has become a big deal because the endless ways we can bring back extinct creatures. Such as, the extinct wooly mammoth, the Tasmanian tiger, and Quagga. With the endless ability to bring back animal from the past with DNA there comes a problem. With human DNA made available so easily science has come to the idea and process of making designer babies. A designer baby is a baby whose genetic makeup has been selected in order to eradicate a particular defect, or to ensure that a particular gene is present. A family gene might be a bad disease which a baby might get when born. Before this, cloning a baby was science fiction idea to people. It was never imagined or even thought possible, but now it is not. Scientist have already started to create ways to clone babies. With this comes the problem of how far should scientist go? This could be both a blessing and a curse.
With so many terrible disabilities and illness thousands that plague thousands of newborns around the world, many wish we could just program or tamper a little with them to make make all imperfections disappear. But when we are suddenly offered this, the question is, is genetic engineering really the right thing to do? While scientists around the world are eager to start working in this new field of genetics, the mass majority of people around the world are very much against this idea and its many risks and potential problems. In my opinion, I would give a limited no to the matter, because while helping people in immense pain and maybe removing an extra chromosome from a child to prevent it from having autism would be a beneficial use, I feel that scientists would eventually take it much too far.
Finally, my last reason why I do not support genetic engineering is because it will make some people enter a bad emotional state. In the movie GATTACA,when a person was perfect, but then later found out he had mistakes they would enter a suicidal state of mind. This happens because the person thinks they’re perfect but when they realise they are not they think they’re a failure. If we start genetically modifying our children they could experience something similar to this. We should just let everyone be
What if there was a future where having a child was as simple as selecting desirable genes out of a catalogue? A future where technology granted parents the ability to design and perfect their children. The notion of “Designer Babies” seems absurd; however the rapid development of technology and the potential of gene manipulation could make this a startling reality.
What traits could be changed in a designer baby? By genetic modeling, designer babies are able to switch gender, appearance, intelligence, disease, or personality. The traits selection is based on the technology of embryo screening. Embryo screening involves a process called preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Embryos are created by in-vitro fertilization and grown to the eight-cell stage, at which point one or two cells are removed. Scientists then examine the DNA of these cells for defects, and only normal embryos are replaced in the womb. By applying such technology, the geneticists are able to provide many beneficial consequences. Briefly, the pros of designer babies is indispensable. It can reduces risk of genetic diseases, and also the risk of inherited medical conditions. It can give a child genes that the parents do not carry, which can also provides better chance the child will succeed in life with an increased life span. And last but not least, it can prevent next generation of family from getting
Science is now able to better improve human health and safety thanks to the advanced modern technology and medicine that are available. Yet with today's technology being implemented into science comes the questions of human morality, or bioethics. One of the bioethics debates is on the coined term “Designer babies”; on if or where society should draw the line on genetically altering our children before they are born. With the technology able to stop hereditary diseases, the scientific development’s are able to change the child’s “eye color, hair color, social intelligence, right down to whether or not your child would have a widow’s peak” before the child is born. From the options on choosing whether or not your child will look or act a certain
Central idea: People should have designer babies because this technology gives great benefits such as parents get to choose healthiest embryos, gender and appearance of their future child
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
Although this may be the case in many areas of people’s lives today, it is not always beneficial, or necessary. People may have trouble deciding whether messing with human genes and cells is ethical. Designing the “perfect child” in many parent’s eyes becomes a harsh question of reality. The concept of a parent’s unconditional love for their child is questioned because of the desire to make their child perfect. If genetically engineering humans becomes a dominant medical option, people could have the chance to create their child however they like: from physical appearances, genetically enhanced genes, and the possibility to decide what a child thinks and acts, parents have access to designing their entire child. Naturally, people could be creating a super-human. Issues between different races, and eventually creating new prejudices against genetically engineered humans may increase. People may not realize how expensive genetic screening is at first. With only the rich being able to “enhance” their children, another social issue might occur, giving the world another type of people to outcast.
In many situations, doctors could and probably would suggest the genetic designing of your offspring.