200350743
The possibility of a gene, or set of genes that could predict one’s likelihood of committing crime is an incredibly interesting theory. This theory, however, creates a multitude of perplexing social issues. If these genes could predict one’s likelihood of committing crimes, then would it not be for the good of society to segregate individuals with these genes? Or do one’s personal freedoms take precedence over the ideas of segregation? It is my belief that segregation of individuals with this gene would be completely unjustifiable, due to the facts that genes do not always manifest the same way in all people, testing people for these genes creates many ethical questions, and the fact that personal freedoms are an important concept on which much of the western world has been built upon. Firstly, genes are a very tricky topic. People carry many genes that never manifest. For example, people often have children with traits that are nothing like their own. The children carry parts of the parent’s genes, but these genes …show more content…
How does a government go about creating a testing programs? Do infants get tested at birth? Are school aged children tested? Also where on earth would a government get such funds from? Genetic testing is incredibly expensive and most governments in the world are in debt already, so what vital programs would they have to cut in order to fund this wild goose chase? If this genetic testing becomes mandatory, then there needs to be consequences in place for those who do not get tested, which creates more need for law enforcement and jails for those people. This again creates more need for funds. Not to mention the idea of segregation. new prisons or settlements would have to be be built for all the people who could potentially have the gene. These would have to be operational before the gene testing began, otherwise these potential criminals would be able to walk free. And we can not be having
The possibility of a gene, or set of genes that could predict one’s likelihood of committing crime is an incredibly interesting theory. This theory, however, creates a multitude of perplexing social issues. If these genes could predict one’s likelihood of committing crimes, then would it not be for the good of society to segregate individuals with these genes? Or do one’s personal freedoms take precedence over the ideas of segregation? It is my belief that segregation of individuals with this gene would be completely unjustifiable, due to the facts that genes do not always manifest the same way in all people, testing people for these genes creates many ethical questions, and the fact that personal freedoms are an important concept on which much of the western world has been built upon. Firstly, genes are a very tricky topic. People carry many genes that never manifest. For example, people often have children with traits that are nothing like their own. The children carry parts of the parent’s genes, but these genes …show more content…
How does a government go about creating a testing programs? Do infants get tested at birth? Are school aged children tested? Also where on earth would a government get such funds from? Genetic testing is incredibly expensive and most governments in the world are in debt already, so what vital programs would they have to cut in order to fund this wild goose chase? If this genetic testing becomes mandatory, then there needs to be consequences in place for those who do not get tested, which creates more need for law enforcement and jails for those people. This again creates more need for funds. Not to mention the idea of segregation. new prisons or settlements would have to be be built for all the people who could potentially have the gene. These would have to be operational before the gene testing began, otherwise these potential criminals would be able to walk free. And we can not be having