Altering the Luck of the Natural Lottery

With the rapid advancement in scientific knowledge of the human genome and the increasing ability to modify and change genes, there was no doubt that one day we would have the option of designing our own child. “Designer babies” is the proper term used by the media to describe a baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected by genetic engineering combined with invitro fertilization to ensure the presence or absence of particular genes for desirable or cosmetic characteristics. The concept of “designing babies” has created various concerns regarding ethical and social implications among the public.

To some people the idea of designing a baby might come off as interesting, where literally parents are able to choose certain genes for their child to inherit, ultimately designing the perfect baby that is incapable of obtaining certain diseases. To others, this idea seems unethical where the process of life is being disrupted and not left to natural outcome. Although, there is some controversy when discussing the morality of this issue, that is, the reason to why a baby is being designed in the first place, to implement a healthy life style or to stand out from the rest and obtain self-pride.

Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a technique used in conjunction with InVitro Fertilization (IVF) is the only legal way to carry out advanced reproductive technologies on embryos to date. The process of PGD along with the juxtaposition of IVF allows scientists to remove a cell from an embryo prior to transfer back to the mother where the DNA in the cell can then be analyzed for novel or inherited genetic errors such as Down syndrome or cystic fibrosis. Normal embryos, based on the genetic analysis, are then chosen for transfer back to the mother’s uterus to achieve pregnancy so the child does not inherit those “bad genes”.

About a decade ago, six year old Molly Nash of Colorado suffered from rare genetic illness Fancomi anaemia, which is invariably fatal. Treated at the Illinois centre, by a team led by Charles Strom, director of medical genetics, they had conceived a son, Adam Nash, who was not only free of inherited disorder but had also been selected from the twelve available embryos to be the best tissue match for Molly, so he could provide a transplant of stem cells taken from his umbilical cord, to treat and potentially, cure her disease. In ones perspective, this may appear as advancement in medical technology, where now we can potentially save the life of others by designing people with the accurate genetics to serve as donors. In others perspective, such as mine, this seems ethically incorrect. Basically under Adam Nash’s circumstances, he was only conceived to save his older sister, other than that his parents did not really want him. Isn’t that not fair for the donor child and aren’t there risked involved in these procedures? But right, he is only a four week old child; he wouldn’t even know its happening. Wrong! He is a living being that deserves equal toleration and respect as any other person.

                 The idea of the perfect human being has been around for a long time. To me, the thought and process of designing a child to ones desire is an immoral practice, even if it is to save another child’s life.  Everyone is born into the world by random chance having unique characteristics and qualities that sets them to be different from any other human being. In my opinion, when we use processes such as Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis, it is a spit in the face for God. Before these new technologies came about, all human reproduction resulted from sexual intercourse, where couples had to prepare for the luck of the natural lottery. Now, with new technology we are able to alter, modify and dispose of this process and that is definitely inhuman and unethical.  

REFERENCES:

"Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations (ActionBioscience)." ActionBioscience - Promoting Bioscience Literacy. Web. 12 Jan. 2011. <http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotech/agar.html>.

"The Future of Designer Babies « Plausible Futures Newsletter." Plausible Futures Newsletter. Web. 12 Jan. 2011. <http://plausiblefutures.wordpress.com/2007/04/07/the-future-of-designer-babies/>.

Laurance, Jeremy, and Steve Connor. "Designer-baby Doctors Make Trouble for a Living. But They Weren't Prepared for This... - Science, News - The Independent." The Independent | News | U:K and Worldwide News | Newspaper. Web. 12 Jan. 2011. <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/designerbaby-doctors-make-trouble-for-a-living-but-they-werent-prepared-for-this-634736.html>.

"PGD Technology Offers More Than Designer Babies." Medical News Today: Health News. Web. 12 Jan. 2011. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/144448.php>.

"What Is a Designer Baby?" Bionet - New Discoveries in Life Sciences - Explore the Science and Debate the Issues. Web. 12 Jan. 2011. http://www.bionetonline.org/english/content/db_cont1.htm

PHOTOS: 

http://www.cpmc.org/images/pregnancy/pgd-embryo.jpg

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYQHqoimdyec7xYNIEROctrEL_dOnOJBZ5cUNjbUvS_Db8_eA4Yjp5g3WoM_qjNwOJ5SC03HMllyHCKdBkPULuyFcK650b_ogMoXgrN3K4St2y2wajd3o-k8pI1Z5FR6ZNC3T-ugqLkFRS/s320/designer+baby+6.jpg

http://nwso.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/logo-baby.jpg

I COMMENTED ON:
http://angelasbioblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/its-blue-eyed-boy-what-i-paid-for-green.html#comments

bcb

 o

 

http://bioblogstuff.blogspot.com/2010/11/designer-babies-how-to-meet-up-with.html#comments