Monday, 8 April 2013

Cons of designer babies
society
 -   A society of pretty, healthy, and intelligent people may sound reasonable and even favorable, until the full social implications are considered. Designing a baby costs money, and will most likely continue to cost lots of money; Genetic engineering for non medical reasons is not necessary for living life and it is doubtful that those who could not afford it would get reimbursed by insurance companies. This cost will mean that not everyone will be able to pay to design their baby, and suddenly people will encounter prejudice, not for their race, but for their inferior genetic makeup. It creates a new class system made up of genetically designed people and naturally made people. The people who were not genetically engineered would experience a loss of opportunity based on a chance that their defective genes will be expressed. In this new society, people with a 50% chance of cancer would get passed over for a job in favor of the person with .01% chance of cancer. That kind of social stratification can be frightening. Even if privacy laws the way they are now stay in place and people’s genetic information is not shared, it could be obvious which children were designed and which were not, creating the same stratification

one gender or other important characteristic is favored over the other.
-In countries such as China and India where boys are favored over girls, this technology could be used so that every set of parents that wants a baby boy will get one. However, that is not evolutionarily favorable. If a generation of only boys were to be made, the human race would die out.

-Without diversity in the species, adaptation to the new environment is more difficult without a wide range of individuals to choose from. The evolution of humans has spanned about 2 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. A large scale of organisms in a particular species is necessary for that species to continue to be competitive with other species and be successful. By creating a generation of genetically similar people, the human species loses its ability to adapt to changing environments

going against ethical values.
-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. This is also considered as going against ethical values.

The Embryos
The choosing of embryos brings to the forefront a large moral issue with designer babies. Many embryos are created, and not as many are implanted into the mother. The embryos that do not fit the specifications set by the parents will get thrown away. Had these embryos have been allowed to grow, they could have had long and fulfilled lives, however the ones that are thrown away lose that potential life. Many people, especially those who are pro-life, view this aspect as a huge problem in the creation of designer babies. If many embryos are going to be thrown away, they should not be created.
Author's POV
"Genetic engineering and designer babies could potentially be a very good thing; however, like any technology, it cannot be abused without rampant ramifications. It is true that many of the scenarios mentioned are worst case. On the other hand, any degree of the scenarios above is still somewhat terrifying. We do not think that the ideas surrounding designer babies are all bad though as there are also advantages to it"

6 comments:

  1. Questions for you:
    1. Where is this article taken from?
    2. Is the source reliable?
    3. The writer feels that PGD can be used but should only be used for medical purposes and must be closely scrutinized. The writer also feels that there are disadvantages and advantages to using PGD. After reading this article, how do you think PGD will affect the society then?
    3. Can there be an alternate view other than the view (ethics) written by this author?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1.This article is taken from http://designerbabies.weebly.com/cons.html
      2.It is reliable as it provided statistics and examples.
      3.Actually you are only supposed to ask me about the article and the author,not my view. However,i shall answer your question,since you asked :)Just like the author,i think PGD will bring both positive and negative implications to the society.
      4.The author did not only mention ethical views,he mentioned financial issues(PGD is costly),gender issues(one gender or other important characteristic is favored over the other)and environmental issues (adaptation to the new environment is more difficult) too! focus on the underlined points! :p

      Delete
  2. Questions
    1. Are the statistics accurate?
    2. Do you think the author's view is based on religion or science?
    3. Is the author an expert on PGD?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1.The statistics are most probably accurate as the authors are biology majors,which makes the statistics accurate.
      2.I think that it is based on both.The embryos and the first 3 paragraphs may be based on science but the part where ethical views were mentioned may be based on relgion.
      3Yes,they're biology majors

      Delete
  3. Questions:
    1. Who is the author?
    2. Where is this source taken from and how reliable is it?
    3. This article is stating the cons of designer babies(purpose). What are your views on this? Do you agree?
    4. In the last line, it was stated that the author said the are advantages to designer babies. Is it stated in the article?
    5. Is the point of view of the author biased to only the cons?

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1.2.There are 4 authors who wrote this article and they are Mona Ahmad,Harshal Desai,Hannah Morgan and Lara Yoon.
    2.This source is taken from http://designerbabies.weebly.com/cons.html It is reliable as the authors who wrote this are biology majors who specialise in the research of biology,includng PGD
    3.Actually you are only supposed to question me about the article and the author,not my views. However,i shall answer your question,since you asked. I agree with the cons.
    4.No,it is not as they are focusing mainly on the disadvantages
    5.I think that the authors are somewhat biased to the cons as they only mentioned the cons throughout the whole article

    ReplyDelete