Should parents be able to engineer their children genetically? The gradual advancement in technology has been felt in different sectors including communications, transport and the medical fields. One of those inventions facilitated by technological advancements in the medical field is genetically engineering of children. The process involves altering the genetic makeup of the child. The bad traits may be removed while the suitable characteristics may be enhanced. There are different engineering processes such as somatic cell gene therapy, germ line therapy and enhancement with their various purposes.
Genetically engineering has been successful, but the inventions have not reached the level of being applied to adults. Like many other medical inventions, this process has also created some ethical, religious and social issues. While some people are in support of the move, others are opposing it. It is evident that the process has its advantages and disadvantages. It may be used to eliminate some genetic disorders such as sickle cell anemia and diabetes, but it might create a divide between the genetically engineered and the ordinary human beings. In my opinion, parents should not genetically engineer their children.
Genetic engineering can be traced back to the introduction of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). IVF allowed couples who had fertility issues or the other reproductive problems such as erectile dysfunction to have their babies. The process could enable doctors to check whether the embryo had hereditary problems such as cystic fibrosis before implanting it into the mother's womb. In 1996, doctors were able to modify the embryo to allow Scott and Monique conceived a girl child after having given birth to several boys. This was a breakthrough of the time and has been modified to the genetically engineering process of the 21st
century (Ly, 2013).
Today, the genetic engineers can alter with the babies characteristic and traits such as eye color, gender, physical characteristics, and immunity among other features. Such modification can enable them to come up with a superhuman who will be immune to communicable diseases and possess extraordinary features. Considering that there is no perfection in the human nature, this move should not be supported. The human population should accept diversity to ease the existence of planet earth.
Those in support of the move argue that it contributes to the reduction of hereditary conditions (Parry, 2013). There has been an increase in these conditions such as diabetes and other health issues. They may lead to death, low quality of life and other costs of treating such conditions. Preventing such circumstances is a beneficial move, but strategies to ensure that the engineering process does not go beyond that point are not available. Such conditions are found in the genetic material and authorities may not be in a position to monitors such process to ensure that illegal operations are not performed.
Secondly, genetic engineering may be used as a proof that our characteristics can be modified. Particularly, biology and medical students may benefit from such lessons. The removal of the unwanted traits and prevention of hereditary diseases may improve the quality of life and increase the human lifespan. Also, the process may be used to eliminate undesirable characteristics such as low intelligence which could be passed over to their generation. The modification of the physical characteristics will enable the scientist to come up with superhumans suited to performing selected activities as robots do. They may also be used for entertainment due to their extraordinarily speed and strength. With the above advantages, the process is associated with many more disadvantages.
Critics believe that discarding the unwanted genes is closer to abortion. Many laws, social and religious beliefs state that life begins when the male and female cells fuse. Since the process is accompanied by errors, many embryos are discarded before a perfect one is made. While the method, useful in eliminating hereditary diseases and deformities, I cannot figure out how the world without such people would be. I believe that all human beings exist for mutual benefits where those with high intellectual capacities are allowed to serve in various positions which otherwise cannot be assigned to others. The process may also establish different physical strengths and appearance. In our society, the healthy persons serve in energy demanding positions such as security. If all human beings were equally healthy it would be futile to have somebody securing you from similarly strong men. Therefore, it makes more sense if such people are somehow different from others.
As seen above, parents would have an opportunity to determine what their kids would be. Some would prefer their children to be the best footballers who have higher stamina, height and speed. In this case, even in a football team, players with different traits are required in different parts. The strikers could be faster while the defensive players may be active. At the same time, it is not a good idea to determine the future of an unborn child. A parent may engineers a child to be the best swimmer, but the kid ends up developing no interest in swimming upon birth. Conflicts would arise between parents and children should they realize that they fate were determined by their parents without their consent. The laws might allow the parents to have autonomy over their unborn children, but it might create issues when a kid is born.
Genetic engineering has been supported by some as it helps in selecting the preferred gender of a child. This might be a disadvantage as it would be difficult to balance the proportion of both genders. Due to a common reason, parents may prefer to conceive girls at a particular time for example. The girls’ population would increase in that period, and issues may arise when they reach their marriageable ages as the men to marry them will be fewer. Cultural changes will be observed where practices such as polygamy will be adapted to bridge the gap. The government and business policies will also need to be readjusted as such policies were adjusted to meet the needs of the baby boomers generation. Still, on the gender perspective, issues would arise when the children come to find that they were modified to be of a particular gender. If opinions are collected today, different people are either content with their genders or would like to be of the opposite genders. However, such issues are not of concern as genetic engineering is not typical.
The praised genetically engineering process has not be proven to be 100%. The scientists might successfully eliminate some hereditary conditions, but no one is sure that the process will not introduce other conditions. In as much as it is beneficial, a slight mistake could have irreversible consequences. For instance, a genetically modified child might grow extraordinarily significant while in the womb and cause the mother's death or both.
Currently, the world is divided on color, racial and other bases. The introduction of genetically modified babies will introduce the divide between them and the rational human beings. The process is expensive and will not be affordable to all. Also, those objecting the move will also fail to engineer their children. It is not sure that the modified children will relate well to others. The process will also reduce the value of human life. Cases such as murder will not be taken seriously as the killer may be required to get the genetic material of the dead, take it to the laboratory for a clone to be made (Ly, 2013).
As noted above, the genetic engineering process may create knowledgeable and robust persons. It would be unfair if the rational human beings would be competing with such creatures. For example, in sports such as football, ordinary human beings will be disadvantaged while competing with those strong and fast human beings. The religious perspective on this matter cannot be ignored. Different religions have different beliefs concerning the origin of human being. For example, the Christians believe that they were created by God in his image and therefore by engineering a baby the scientist would be playing God (Ehrbar, 2015).
In conclusion, genetically engineering of babies has the good and the wrong sides. Since the disadvantages outweigh the advantages, the practice should not be supported. It leads to the elimination of hereditary health conditions such as sickle cell anemia and diabetes and unwanted traits.The process can also enable couples with different reproductive problems to have their babies. It can be used to create superhumans with higher intellectual and physical characteristics for different purposes. On the other hand, it will establish a divide between the engineered and the regular humans. It is not a good idea to predetermine the future of their unborn babies without their consent as this would create conflicts later. The process is not 100% safe and guaranteed even though critics argue that the natural birth is may also be unsafe and uncertain.
References
Ehrbar, J. T. (2015). Ethical Considerations of Genetic Manipulation in Sport. The Sports Journal. doi:10.17682/sportjournal/2015.018
Ly, S. (2013, March 31). Ethics of Designer Babies | The Embryo Project Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/ethics-designer-babies
Parry, W. (2013, February 18). Designing Life: Should Babies Be Genetically Engineered? Retrieved from https://www.livescience.com/27206-genetic-engineering-babies-debate.html
