What if you had the choice to save an embryo would you do it if that meant you could have more than one child? Imagine you have a genetic disease and the only option to have children is using the in-vitro fertilization method. This means taking your viable embryos testing and choosing the one that is "healthy" without the disease to have a child while the others get disposed. But, what if you could save them by genetically modifying the DNA sequences using gene technology within the embryos to make it so that they no longer had the disease? Ronald M. Green the author of "Building Baby from the Genes Up” uses his experiences in biomedical ethics to tell his readers that the main reason as to why people are against genetic modifications is because
…show more content…
Those that know that this a new technological advance will know that there will be many advantages along with the disadvantages. In this article Green’s main purpose is to tells us the many advantages of gene modification and why people should change their minds on this technological advance. One of the points he makes is the problem with using the in-vitro fertilization process to avoid genetic disease. The embryos that would be disposed during the picking and choosing of “healthy” embryos could potentially live for forty or fifty years without ever developing a genetic disease, and there is also chance that the embryo could even never develop the disease (Green 1). With this point Green is trying to prove that gene technology can provide more knowledge about genes allowing people to know more about an individuals’ embryos or genomes, what causes these diseases, and how to fix theses DNA …show more content…
He states that the four main concerns about gene manipulation are the effect of gene modification on the parents, our freedom, our social divisions, and people’s religions. The first concern is if parents will replace the love for their child “with a consumerist mentality that seeks perfection” (Green 2). Parents who wish for healthy children and have one born with disabilities love their child unconditionally regardless of having perfect genes. Gene modification would not change this fact because “that child is already remarkably influenced by the genes they inherit” (Green 3). The second concern is if our freedom will be diminished “by making us creatures of our genes or of our parents’ whims” (Green 2). By going ahead with gene modification this would allow us to know more about our genetic makeup, our weaknesses and our strengths. So, instead of diminishing our freedom it would give us the freedom of knowing more of what we are able to do and what we cannot do. The third concern is the fear that our social division will widen as the “affluent ‘buy’ more competitive abilities for their offspring” (Green 2). This could be catastrophic, however Green focused more on the positive side of things and states that this could also be “a tool for reducing the class divide” (Green 3). The fourth and final concern that Green addresses is religion and how this
Those that know that this a new technological advance will know that there will be many advantages along with the disadvantages. In this article Green’s main purpose is to tells us the many advantages of gene modification and why people should change their minds on this technological advance. One of the points he makes is the problem with using the in-vitro fertilization process to avoid genetic disease. The embryos that would be disposed during the picking and choosing of “healthy” embryos could potentially live for forty or fifty years without ever developing a genetic disease, and there is also chance that the embryo could even never develop the disease (Green 1). With this point Green is trying to prove that gene technology can provide more knowledge about genes allowing people to know more about an individuals’ embryos or genomes, what causes these diseases, and how to fix theses DNA …show more content…
He states that the four main concerns about gene manipulation are the effect of gene modification on the parents, our freedom, our social divisions, and people’s religions. The first concern is if parents will replace the love for their child “with a consumerist mentality that seeks perfection” (Green 2). Parents who wish for healthy children and have one born with disabilities love their child unconditionally regardless of having perfect genes. Gene modification would not change this fact because “that child is already remarkably influenced by the genes they inherit” (Green 3). The second concern is if our freedom will be diminished “by making us creatures of our genes or of our parents’ whims” (Green 2). By going ahead with gene modification this would allow us to know more about our genetic makeup, our weaknesses and our strengths. So, instead of diminishing our freedom it would give us the freedom of knowing more of what we are able to do and what we cannot do. The third concern is the fear that our social division will widen as the “affluent ‘buy’ more competitive abilities for their offspring” (Green 2). This could be catastrophic, however Green focused more on the positive side of things and states that this could also be “a tool for reducing the class divide” (Green 3). The fourth and final concern that Green addresses is religion and how this