Selection of a child's genetic characteristics has affected nation's worldwide. This moral-ethical issued topic has transformed many people's opinions on whether to alter their future children's genetic makeup or not. Designer babies started off as a science fiction concept. However, due to rapid increases in technology advances, genetic selection has become possible all over the world. Now when, where, and how did it start is the question as of right now.
Genetic Selection is the process by which certain traits become more widespread in a species than other traits. These traits seen in an organism are due to the genes found on the chromosomes (Erika Steele, 2017). Screening procedures are done on the embryos and on a fetus in the womb of …show more content…
Due to the advancements in technology, that has become possible. Some traits that you can alter as well are the overall personality and levels of intelligence. What are the pros and cons? Some pros can be to increase life expectancy, you get to "call the shots". As for cons, many parents end up giving the baby for adoption after its born, it's a violation of the baby's rights, it isn't error-free. It can lead to death even before its born, not affordable, take away the child's personality, and they could end up removing the healthy genes from development and growth. So it is a nonguaranteed …show more content…
Mr. Krimsky argued in support that genetic modification should be prohibited which I would have to agree with. Although, being able to remove any gene that would hold an inherited disease from either the mother or father is a very astonishing, altering with other enhancements such as heightened intelligence, strength, and etc. just doesn't sound right to me. In my opinion, a child is a gift to the parents and it shouldn't be altered with. They should love it anyway or form it comes in. There is no such thing as a "perfect" child, it's unrealistic. "The greater danger of a belief in genetic engineering lies in its likely social impact. Eugenics, the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics, will inevitably be used by those with wealth and power to make others believe that prenatal genetic modification makes people better. This would be as much a myth as believing that the sperm from Nobel Laureates will produce a genius child" Sheldon Krimsky stated. I completely agree with him on this because it truly is inevitable. Also, that it can harm the baby as its developing in the womb. I believe that society shouldn't have the obligation to determine whether technology should benefit or harm the infant. Parents should be happy with whatever outcome they get when the child
Genetic Selection is the process by which certain traits become more widespread in a species than other traits. These traits seen in an organism are due to the genes found on the chromosomes (Erika Steele, 2017). Screening procedures are done on the embryos and on a fetus in the womb of …show more content…
Due to the advancements in technology, that has become possible. Some traits that you can alter as well are the overall personality and levels of intelligence. What are the pros and cons? Some pros can be to increase life expectancy, you get to "call the shots". As for cons, many parents end up giving the baby for adoption after its born, it's a violation of the baby's rights, it isn't error-free. It can lead to death even before its born, not affordable, take away the child's personality, and they could end up removing the healthy genes from development and growth. So it is a nonguaranteed …show more content…
Mr. Krimsky argued in support that genetic modification should be prohibited which I would have to agree with. Although, being able to remove any gene that would hold an inherited disease from either the mother or father is a very astonishing, altering with other enhancements such as heightened intelligence, strength, and etc. just doesn't sound right to me. In my opinion, a child is a gift to the parents and it shouldn't be altered with. They should love it anyway or form it comes in. There is no such thing as a "perfect" child, it's unrealistic. "The greater danger of a belief in genetic engineering lies in its likely social impact. Eugenics, the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics, will inevitably be used by those with wealth and power to make others believe that prenatal genetic modification makes people better. This would be as much a myth as believing that the sperm from Nobel Laureates will produce a genius child" Sheldon Krimsky stated. I completely agree with him on this because it truly is inevitable. Also, that it can harm the baby as its developing in the womb. I believe that society shouldn't have the obligation to determine whether technology should benefit or harm the infant. Parents should be happy with whatever outcome they get when the child