More and more each day, the term ‘designer babies’ seems to cause controversy between many of scientists, parents, organizations and individuals around the world. A designer baby is a child whose genotype, physical characteristics and susceptibility to hereditary disease, is selected by its parents. Advances in genetics have given birth to this concept of 'designer baby', wherein parents and doctors are able to genetically screen embryos for any genetic disorders. A technique called ‘In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)’ involves the fertilization of the egg by the sperm in test tubes, outside the mother's body. This allows doctors to screen the embryos. Genetic screening has made it possible to eliminate genes associated with several genetic defects and illnesses. The picture and video below shows how genetic screening and vitro fertilization works:
With such great controversy on the topic, designer babies are sure to have its share of pros and cons. Because parents are able to genetically screen the baby before it is born, with “pre-implantation process,” they are able to detect the possibility of the baby being born with a disease and prevent this from happening. Still, other parents use the same process mentioned above, not only for health reasons but for cosmetic reasons. For varied prices, parents can choose the gender, eye, skin and hair color of the baby. Numerous other physical traits such as intelligence, beauty, height, stopping a propensity towards obesity, freedom from mental illnesses, athletic ability, etc. can be also determined.
This prompts the question: Is there a moral distinction between treating or preventing disease and enhancing traits? A further moral complication comes from the different approaches to treating disease and those who suffer from them. For example: genetically modifying an embryo to remove a gene linked with a higher than average risk of asthma, but it doesn't prevent the existence of the person who might have suffered from it.
Think about it. The concept of designer babies will lead to discrimination on the basis of certain qualities or traits. Kids of rich families will receive genetic enhancement leading to genetic 'aristocracy.' This gives them an unfair advantage over the other children. People unable to afford genetic screening will be looked down upon, causing a 'gap' in our society. Most parts of the world are still male dominated, and sex or gender determination of the baby can lead to gender discrimination across the world. Also, if the concept of 'designer babies' grows rapidly in the future, there is always the element of parents creating a designer baby for their own personal gain. Creating offspring this way only leads further and further away from the 'natural' births humans are able to give. For many of us around the world, it is time to realize that we, as humans can't control everything around the world.
Word Count: 493
References:
"What's a Designer Baby?". Bionet. 2002. 12 Nov 2010.
Agar, Nicholas. "Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations." actionbio.org. 2006. 12 Nov 2010.
Johnson, Priya. "Pros and Cons of Designer Babies." Buzzle.com. 12 Nov 2010.
Steere, Mike. "Designer Babies: Creating the Perfect Child." CNN Tech. 30/10/2008. 12 Nov 2010.
Henderson, Mark. "Demand for 'designer babies' to grow dramatically." The Sunday Times. 07/01/2010. 12 Nov 2010.
Blogs I Commented On:
I agree that humans have to understand that we can not manipulate everything to our advantage. I believe that there are consequences to such behavior. Therefore I disagree with the concept of "designer babies". As you mentioned there would be a lot of discrimiantion (difference in class and sexism), pressure on the children and abandoned infants. What if the parents genetically modify the baby but he/she does not grow up they way the adults anticpated? Are the children to blame? Are the scientist to blame? In fact, designer babies may start trends, just like purses and toy dogs. What will happen when the baby is no longer in "style"? Does he/she get abandoned at an orphanage? There are a lot of ethical issues concerning "designer babies". Sometimes, one has to consider whether the disadvantages of such scientific engineering out ways the advantages.
ReplyDeleteI liked your bioblog. It was informative. Also, I liked how you explained the process to give the readers and general background knowledge. I think there are some sections that could have been worded better (i.e. there was a repetition of the term "screen the embroyos" in one of the paragraphs). Other than that, you did a wonderful job.
Hey Mary, great BioBlog! I agree that there are many cons to the concept of "designer babies." Though it may be tempting for parents to rid disease affected genes or even choose desirable traits such as eye colour for their unborn child, I personally feel that it isn't ethical. The IVF sand PGD processes are very expensive and not 100 percent safe. Furthermore, if we actually came to the point where we could choose what our children would look and how they could act, we would be taking away their say in their life. What's more, if more and more children are being made to look and act the same way, biodiveristy will decrease dramtically. Biodiveristy is what allows us to survive. If it diminishes, it would result in long term disaster. Humans shouldn't be meddling with such a complex thing like genetics. We should know our limits and let nature run its course.
ReplyDeleteHey Mary! Very informative bio blog! When talking about the fact that IVF would help parents have children without any severe diseases or eliminating generations of family sickness, i think its right because it would decrease the number of people would have sickness, and it would also save parents some money and time since taking care of such baby takes lots of money, time and effort. Doing cosmetic changes is going overboard, your child won't even look like you, it like having a barbie doll with perfect features. The next generation population would be totally transformed andc newly created, it would be a new human trace. I agree with the gap being there because this level of rich and poor is going to be created and huge controversies. the dominance of the sexes is going to arise for sure because couples would want to create their child, their preferrred sex so their would be an unbalance. We are supposed to promote more and more "natural births" so people won't be willing of thinking about these procedures. Yes, IVF is very convinient for couples that can consume or eliminate a gene with a sever sickness/disorder but changing the whole look of your child is unnatural. What's the point of nature's work then, soon after we would become super-humans.
ReplyDelete