Currently, the issue of genetically designed babies has been made easy by technological advancements. Until recently, the genetic modification or manipulation of babies, for example, customizing a baby’s sex, how babies should appear (hair color and eye color) and the avoidance of particular genetic deformities (e.g. handicaps or diseases) was a hit miss situation. Presently, fertility doctors are giving couples with access to the most recent genetically manipulated test skills, the chance to determine their babies’ sexes or any such desired modification with greater precision. In the coming few years, it could be likely that babies could be screened before conception for a wider variety of attributes. These attributes are like, “how tall they’re likely to be, what body type they will have, their hair and eye color, what sorts of illnesses they will be naturally resistant to, and even, conceivably, their IQ and personality type” (Lemonick, Jerklie & Park, 2). If the genetically designed analysis is true to its promise, couples could sooner or later be able to surpass the weeding-out of unwanted characteristics in their babies and probably begin to actually, insert desired genetic traits in their children. They might even be able to do this on genes engineered from a laboratory.
Before long, these couples may be visiting fertility doctors to pick from a prepared list of preferences the same way individuals buying vehicles could order specifically customized cars. However, this technology does not go without criticism, for example, a biotech critic (Jeremy Rifkin) shocked by the technology, asserts that “it’s an ultimate shopping experience designing your baby. In a society used to cosmetic surgery and psychopharmacology, this is not a big step”. (Lemonick, Jerklie & Park, 2) This paper will therefore focus on this issue by displaying my views on the subject, and then show my preferences on a designer baby.
The colloquial term “designer baby” refers to a baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected by genetic engineering combined with in vitro fertilization to ensure the presence or absence of particular genes or characteristics. The term is derived by comparison with “designer clothing”. It implies the ultimate commoditization of children and is therefore usually used pejoratively to signal opposition to such use of repro-genetics (McGee, 12).
Currently, the world is being driven by technology; this technology, therefore, has numerous benefits to families. The outlook of this issue, similar to a lot of other moral challenges created by the genetic revolution, has confronted the globe so fast to the extent where physicians, ethicists, Christians, and politicians have started to come to grips with the repercussion, and are trying to decide which way to go. In my point of view, I don’t see anything wrong with the issue at hand; since such technology helps any family that has decided to go this way build a healthy future. This technology is beneficial because numerous numbers of diseases can be mitigated before conception. Besides this, as a parent, I can get the child of my dreams. This is a kind of baby with all the characteristics I desire in a child (i.e. the sex of the baby, hair color, and eye color). With this technology, therefore, I cannot regret having my child since all characters in the child would be doctored to my or our (as parents) desires.
It is evident that for a considerable amount of time now technological expertise known as PGD (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis), has allowed IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) hospitals to diagnosis an embryo for over one hundred potentially incapacitating and often fatal ailments before it can be implanted in the mother. A medicinal revolution has therefore opened up, and thus enabled factually millions of parents and their children to avoid a lot of the world’s worse ailments. In addition to this, doctors can eliminate elements of mental retarded disabilities as well as physical ones besides being able to choose the sex of the baby. I feel that this is a technology to be embraced for sidestepping some common diseases and disabilities in our genes. We cannot just sit back and watch an impending quandary when technological advancement is at our disposal to take care of it. An example of this is that in my desire for a baby girl I could use this technology to manipulate results in my favor. This would make me happier whereas with the lack of this technology I could have had a baby boy. Furthermore, these kinds of technological activities are done at the parent’s own decisions in sound mind. Parents are given comprehensive details on the details embodied in the practice and it is up to them to decide whether to carry it out or not. Because of these, I feel there is no moral evil when I want my baby to be genetically modified as this would make my family happy.
The advantages of this technology surpass the disadvantages. For instance, in diseases like cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia, or additional single genetic imperfection, “where the DNA mutation is limited to a specific location on a gene, PGD can diagnose affected embryos. After the biopsy of one or two cells, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is used to amplify the DNA sequence of interest” (Kleiner, 8). The standard and irregular gene sequence in DNA can be augmented and put to particular probes, which shows the embryos that could be impinged on by the transformation. In situations where precise mutation effects can’t be made out, genetic markers placed close to the transformation of interest can be used to mark out the affected embryos.
As a person, I do have my preferences on the kind of designer baby I would possibly want. “Genetic modification can be used to alter anything from gender to disease, and eventually appearance, personality and even IQ” (Baird, 8). Before I take any step though I have to discuss this with my spouse. I would want the child to be genetically designed so that I get a baby girl. I love girls and this has been my passion for a long time. I would prefer the baby to be cute having blue eyes and blond hair. This would be my preference because I feel this is not common beauty in society. I would still want the baby to be modified so that she maintains a slim model-like figure when she grows up. If the aspect of intelligence can be incorporated, then I would like my baby to be a genius. I would like her to have a great attractive personality with great athletic capabilities. If it is possible I would like my designed baby to be highly physically attractive. “This would enhance her universal perception widespread universally so that she can fit in all cultures, social aspects and personal subjective preferences” (Baird, 8).
Generally, I would want the baby to grow into a beautiful model with an athletic posture, intelligent, respectful, attractive, passionate, and resourceful, responsible, and somebody who can take care of herself and the immediate family when she grows up.
Society will certainly be affected when more and more pregnancies are worked out this way. First of all this technology would be helpful to society. A lot of fetal ailments will be reduced in society and thus reducing the overall death rate. This factor will also be responsible for the reduction of costs that could otherwise have been taken to medical attention; therefore there would be an overall economic advantage. More and more families would again become happy by having their desired babies (i.e. gender modified, looks and capabilities including doing away with disability cases).
As much as this technology is beneficial to society, there are still some detrimental effects it can cause to society. If in any case, if all babies designed in particular societies are made to be geniuses, for example, the balance in that society would be compromised. This is because any society whatsoever is supposed to have all kinds of individuals for it to be complete. Again, some individuals in society could use this technology to doctor specific genes for all the wrong reasons. Using the example of Hitler for instance, there was a time when it was said that some Germans wanted to genetically modify another person to have the same notions as Hitler had. With this kind of unchecked practice, this technology can be doctored to create a lot of people having social ills. This will bring forth a lot of social injustices in society due to technology. If again this technology is taken up by all families, society would miss the elements or the beauty of natural births. Lastly, this technology is a little bit expensive, this is to say it too can cause a negative economic impact, or only the affluent in the society can use it.
It is evident that in the world today, most people have turned to this technology despite a lot of criticism from ethical and moral critics. As shown by Kleiner (8), a lot of this technology is used in the determination and creation of the desired gender of a baby. “Gender was the first major genetic trait beyond genetic disease to be widely manipulated through PGD. The Fertility Institutes is a leader in the field, claiming nearly 100% success in providing couples with a baby of a predetermined gender” (Kleiner, 8). Healthy and productive partners globally do visit fertility institutes, clinics, and hospitals to take up this technological advancement. This is as a result of the capabilities of choosing what they want in the baby.
Gender selection is a big business. Dr. Steinberg, Director at The Fertility Institutes, claims that they are performing on the order of 10 gender selection fertilizations every week, each for a fee of $18,400. Although In Vitro Fertilization were originally designed to help parents that we’re unable to conceive children naturally, Steinberg says that a staggering 70% of their clients have absolutely no difficulty conceiving children, coming to the Institute purely for the opportunity to choose the sex of their baby (Kleiner, 8).
Currently, Fertility centers and clinics are responsible for carrying out these technological revolutions. On the other hand, they are subject to a lot of criticism from people opposing this technology. Among these people are Christians and moral critics. This technology is formally out to the public it has been present for considerably longer. Consequently, this technological revolution cannot be stopped. Even if a few nations are trying to pull away from it, many others will embrace it. “A similar phenomenon has unfolded with embryonic stem cell research in recent years. Even as the Bush administration almost completely strangled US investment and research in this promising field, other countries invested heavily and advances continued” (Kleiner, 8).
A new invention of this kind of doctored children is expected in the coming years. Although some of us who are normal have no desperation, as much as we might seem outmatched by the coming invention along genetic lines, a horde of the latest technological advancements from chip implants to genetic therapies could make us pair up. This might just allow us to make an enhancement that might be similarly transformative. Therefore, as shown in this paper, the future of this kind of technology is going to be indeed interesting.
Works Cited
Baird, Stephen. Designer Babies: Eugenics Repackaged or Consumer Options. Genetic Modification, 132.(4): 8-22. 2007. Print.
Kleiner, Keith. Designer babies: Like it or not, Here they come. Designer baby genetics, 41(1), 12-45. 2009. Print.
Lemonick, David., Jerklie, David., & Park, Alice. Designer Babies. New York, NY: Dick Thompson Publishers. 2000. Print.
McGee, Glenn. The Perfect Baby: A Pragmatic Approach to Genetics. New York. Rowman & Littlefield. 2000. Print.