Q2. Do parents show a morally problematic attitude to their children if they genetically enhance them?
The word ‘designer baby’ refers to an infant whose genetic traits are artificially modified to assure presence or absence of a particular characteristic (Sandel, 2004). Sandel (2004) claims that alteration of genetic make-up can change and bring about the problematic situation between the parent-child relationships. Ethically this is immoral. In my perspective, parents who try to modify their children can act out of love, similar as to those parents who send their children to private schools, can act out of affection. Parents who hereditarily adjust the qualities of the child show morally problematic attitude in many ways such as- if the …show more content…
In my opinion, CS commodifies children in morally problematic ways where the child lacks the natural bond with her mother pre and post pregnancy leading to traumatic circumstances. Surrogacy is delegated as a form of an ‘alienated labour’ where women’s conceptive limits are exercised as a physical labour, and the status of that child is consigned as a commodity (Anderson, 2000; McLachlan & Swales, 2009). Therefore, the business of surrogacy is ethically problematic since it comprises the transaction of the child. Such course of action damages the human pride of the child. This essay will primarily address the issues related to CS, how it subordinates and externalises the well-being of the child. Hence, the answer to this question may vary depending on the context and situation. There is no definite answer to this question. However, in my perspective CS is immoral and it commodifies children in many problematic …show more content…
It is immoral to use children as a commodity where surrogate mothers are paid by a third party to give birth to a baby. Hence, children are not products to be purchased and sold, and women are not compartments to be exploited as child creators and then to be terminated.
Word Count: 789
References.
Anderson, E. S. (2000). Why commercial surrogate motherhood unethically commodifies women and children: reply to McLachlan and Swales. Health Care Analysis, 8(1), 19-26.
Beard, M. (2014). Gammy Chanbua and the Problem of the Commodification of Persons. ABC Religion and Ethics. Retrieved from: http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/08/11/4064996.htm
Giunta, H.C. (2015). In defence of childhood experience: Benefit vs. Burden in genetic enhancement. Michigan State University. Retrieved from: https://cctst.uc.edu/sites/default/files/2015/Giunta,%20Hannah%20CincinnatiPoster.pdf
McLachlan, H. V., & Swales, J. K. (2009). Commercial surrogate motherhood and the alleged commodification of children: a defense of legally enforceable contracts. Law and Contemporary Problems, 72(3), 91-107.
Sandel, M. (2004). The case against perfection. The Atlantic Monthly, 293(3),
The word ‘designer baby’ refers to an infant whose genetic traits are artificially modified to assure presence or absence of a particular characteristic (Sandel, 2004). Sandel (2004) claims that alteration of genetic make-up can change and bring about the problematic situation between the parent-child relationships. Ethically this is immoral. In my perspective, parents who try to modify their children can act out of love, similar as to those parents who send their children to private schools, can act out of affection. Parents who hereditarily adjust the qualities of the child show morally problematic attitude in many ways such as- if the …show more content…
In my opinion, CS commodifies children in morally problematic ways where the child lacks the natural bond with her mother pre and post pregnancy leading to traumatic circumstances. Surrogacy is delegated as a form of an ‘alienated labour’ where women’s conceptive limits are exercised as a physical labour, and the status of that child is consigned as a commodity (Anderson, 2000; McLachlan & Swales, 2009). Therefore, the business of surrogacy is ethically problematic since it comprises the transaction of the child. Such course of action damages the human pride of the child. This essay will primarily address the issues related to CS, how it subordinates and externalises the well-being of the child. Hence, the answer to this question may vary depending on the context and situation. There is no definite answer to this question. However, in my perspective CS is immoral and it commodifies children in many problematic …show more content…
It is immoral to use children as a commodity where surrogate mothers are paid by a third party to give birth to a baby. Hence, children are not products to be purchased and sold, and women are not compartments to be exploited as child creators and then to be terminated.
Word Count: 789
References.
Anderson, E. S. (2000). Why commercial surrogate motherhood unethically commodifies women and children: reply to McLachlan and Swales. Health Care Analysis, 8(1), 19-26.
Beard, M. (2014). Gammy Chanbua and the Problem of the Commodification of Persons. ABC Religion and Ethics. Retrieved from: http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/08/11/4064996.htm
Giunta, H.C. (2015). In defence of childhood experience: Benefit vs. Burden in genetic enhancement. Michigan State University. Retrieved from: https://cctst.uc.edu/sites/default/files/2015/Giunta,%20Hannah%20CincinnatiPoster.pdf
McLachlan, H. V., & Swales, J. K. (2009). Commercial surrogate motherhood and the alleged commodification of children: a defense of legally enforceable contracts. Law and Contemporary Problems, 72(3), 91-107.
Sandel, M. (2004). The case against perfection. The Atlantic Monthly, 293(3),