A goal all parents have in common is for their child to prosper throughout their whole entire life. There is no better way to guarantee that than to alter their genes to make them more attractive and/or athletic. This is a highly controversial method because the parents are changing their child before they are born. Thus, not allowing the child to be who he/she is meant to be. Leslie Pray describes reprogenetics as “extracting a single cell from an eight-cell embryo and analyzing the DNA of that single cell for the presence of one or more disease-associated genetic alterations” (Embryo Screening and the Ethics of Human Genetic Engineering). Only the healthy embryos are put into the mother’s uterus. When this process was just beginning, it
…show more content…
Although human genetic engineering is an innovative process, Leslie Pray and Danielle Simmons provide sufficient evidence to justify the limits that should be placed on these types of medical …show more content…
When parents genetically enhance their children with genes of these additional skills, it defeats the whole purpose of working to get where an athlete wants to be. People tend to lose focus of the true meaning of sportsmanship and begin to “abuse scientific research in an attempt to gain an unjust advantage over their competitors” (Simmons). People already use illegal substances such as steroids to develop this unfair advantage, but it still doesn’t change the fact that it is wrong on numerous levels. The main interest in watching sports is to see how endless training can lead an individual to success. It would seem pointless watching a collection of steroid injected men playing a sport that they hardly had to practice for. Simmons uses the word abuse in her statement about genetic athleticism and it gives off a negative connotation. Almost forcing the readers to infer that she is against this unfair advantage of “gene doping” (Genetic Inequality). Simmons also refers to those children who have been modified to have a certain eye and hair color as designer babies. This leaves all of those with “boring” features to be considered generic babies. The cause of separating our society into generic and designer is just the same as splitting it into the wealthy and the poor. Generic refers to an off-brand company of some sort and designer means the more desired product. This
Although human genetic engineering is an innovative process, Leslie Pray and Danielle Simmons provide sufficient evidence to justify the limits that should be placed on these types of medical …show more content…
When parents genetically enhance their children with genes of these additional skills, it defeats the whole purpose of working to get where an athlete wants to be. People tend to lose focus of the true meaning of sportsmanship and begin to “abuse scientific research in an attempt to gain an unjust advantage over their competitors” (Simmons). People already use illegal substances such as steroids to develop this unfair advantage, but it still doesn’t change the fact that it is wrong on numerous levels. The main interest in watching sports is to see how endless training can lead an individual to success. It would seem pointless watching a collection of steroid injected men playing a sport that they hardly had to practice for. Simmons uses the word abuse in her statement about genetic athleticism and it gives off a negative connotation. Almost forcing the readers to infer that she is against this unfair advantage of “gene doping” (Genetic Inequality). Simmons also refers to those children who have been modified to have a certain eye and hair color as designer babies. This leaves all of those with “boring” features to be considered generic babies. The cause of separating our society into generic and designer is just the same as splitting it into the wealthy and the poor. Generic refers to an off-brand company of some sort and designer means the more desired product. This