Genetically modifying children Genetically modifying children is a new concept and a possible actuality that can happen in the future. While research progresses to make genetic modification a reality many up and coming parents think about the possibility to genetically modify their child to create a greater overall human. Although creating a more improved human has benefits such as greater increased resistant to diseases and medical conditions genetic modification, it will cause an issue even larger which is a societal gap. A societal gap can cause a negative affect in society which effects all races and cultures. This societal gap can all be caused because of the genetic modification of children. Because of a child being genetically modified
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
Genetic Modification is often perceived as the answer to humanity’s faults because it will enhance human abilities, prevent the survival of incapacitating disabilities, and guide the innovation of the future. Sounds pretty good, right? That is not the reality. Genetic modification is not the solution to the ubiquitous problems of the human race, but rather infringes on individual rights, decreases diversity, permits too much power to the human race, and contributes to overpopulation.
Should parent be allowed to genetically engineer their children? : The ethical dilemma of designer babies.
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.
In recent years, a debate has sparked whether or not genetic engineering in children should be allowed. Genetic engineering is done to insure that children are born with certain genes. My belief is that genetic engineering should not be used for selfish reasons such as 'perfecting' our children. Genetic engineering should not be used to perfect the imperfections in unborn children. The idea that we as humans must fix everything wrong in our lives is somewhat normal.
With the informational facts given overtime most of us can conclude that health is the major issue that we must focus on for genetic modification, not only for the embryo but for the individual carrying the embryo or even the society. Health not only includes the embryo's risk of catching a cold but also obtaining severe genes that may be life threatening such as cancer being passed down or even HIV/Aids. The society also is something to think about with the health issue, thinking about if genetic modification of embryos will affect the family's gene pool, other siblings, the embryo as he or she gets older, and even how the environment surrounding the embryo will act towards he or she in which can all affect a person's mindset and viewpoint as a whole. Genetic modification must be addressed for the interest and health of future subjects and risk takers who will actually think about “building” their babies look and
Though it is evident that the concept of “Designer Babies” would prove unpopular amongst the majority of society, there still remains to be advocates for a future compromising of GM children. It is argued that gene technology will bring about a new age of human beings who are happier, smarter and healthier. Supporters look forward to a future when parents could quite literally assemble their children from genes listed in a catalogue. A future in which the health, appearance, personality and life span of our children become mere artefacts of genetic modification.
Picture a future where everyone is perfect, where judgment would not exist because no one is ugly, everyone is beautiful and flawless. In this “perfect” world each individual would be gifted in a specific category that they would excel in and go beyond what an average mundane could. This is a possible scenario we may encounter in the future if we allow the research of genetically- modified embryos (GM babies) to continue. Discussed by many, this topic has become increasingly popular. For some people this interests them in the sense that we can become the best versions of ourselves, simply by changing our genes. Another reason people support GM babies is that there is experiments that can prevent babies from being born with genetic health problems. Although the creation of these altered GM babies has some advantages, there are several problems that people must consider before we decide to go ahead with these plans. For example, genetic research will disrupt the natural order, which can lead to designer babies or GM babies born with side effects. The dangers of these experiments will greatly affect the world we live in. We must not rush into the practice of GM babies without letting the populations know the outcomes these GM babies can have in our society. Try to help everyone grasp the definition of GM babies and also explain how experiments on embryo can lead to designer babies.
Technology is developing every day. The automobile was revolutionary, and then they introduced the plane. Cell phones can connect us with people around the world. Self-driving cars are in development today! Revolutionary inventions are the expectation nowadays, but a new discovery is sparking controversial questions in the science world. Is it acceptable to alter a baby’s genes to make it a better human? Genes are the instruction book of the body, and they determine everyone’s attributes and how people act in their environment (Medical News Today). Some people say that everyone is different for a reason, and others think customizing the genes of children was meant to happen. Altering an infant’s genes is acceptable to prevent hereditary diseases, but the line should be drawn at making an artificially smarter, stronger, or prettier human.
Legally this could cause many problems and issues because although this could help many things could go wrong as well and potentially not work and end the child's life or if they do end up getting diseases parents can start sueing for a lot of money and can make the gene modifying seen as a bad thing entirely.
Growing up, my curiosity began to develop at a young age. Educational television was a factor in this development. One example of the many educational television programs that I watched at a young age covered diverse lifestyles of assorted tribes. As I grew older, the programs led me to question the tribal communities access to basic human rights and how the community was able to preserve their traditional values and cultural norms. Later on in life, I wanted to seek the knowledge about the questions I had as a young adult. This led me to pursue a Bachelor’s degree in Sociology at Murray State University. I was able to gain knowledge to better answer the questions I had. As I absorbed the research, I took an interest in the treatment of women,
Hayes warns of a world where “if misapplied, they would exacerbate existing inequalities and reinforce existing modes of discrimination” (Hayes, 500). The tenacious Green admits to the faults genetic interference can cause, recognizing that “...the social effects of genetics are worrisome. The risks of producing a genobility, genetic overlooks ruling a vast genetic underclass, are real”
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.
The death Penalty is a very controversial topic to many. Some believe that the death penalty should not only be in place but there should be more executions every year. While others believe that the death penalty is going out of style and it is not serving its purpose of deterring crime as it did before. Although there are many claims supporting both sides still over half of Americans are for capital punishment in some way, but what causes someone to be sentenced to death? According to the article “Against the American System of Capital Punishment” by Jack Greenberg the worst crime is, “a putative killer of one’s parent or child” (Greenberg). What makes this the worst crime? And out of the few executions are these the only people getting
Biotechnology interventions are used to advance human brains and our future to the extreme. The process of genetic engineering is very unpredictable and dramatic that it will have a major effect on its environment. Human genetic manipulation is considered unethical and dangerous for the most part. Human genetic alteration is illegal in many countries, but it is used in some places to cure gene diseases. The process of changing the genetic DNA of when a baby is born can be passed down the line of the persons. Swapping bad and unwanted genes for a better one is part of the process. There are many potential advantages gained from this operation as well as some dangers. Considering the ethical implications of the gene enhancement the result might cause a gene problem. The advanced technology application can make a huge different especially improving the quality of a human being by fixing an unwanted and inheritable gene defects. Many people are affected