Designer babies

Overview

Designer babies are babies that have been genetically and artificially engineered in vitro; a process that takes place outside the mother’s womb. These babies have specifically selected and modified traits and characteristics, which could be selected or de-selected for various reasons. Examples of selection of genetic engineering include the modification of particular genes, or specific characteristics such as gender, disease, or appearance. There exists many controversies in performing these procedures in humans. Some people have moral issues against interfering with the natural course of human life. While others support advancements in scientific research and potential for diseases curing medicines and technologies.

Background of IVF

In vitro fertilization refers to assisted reproductive technology, in which eggs are fertilized through extraction, by collecting a sperm sample, to manually combine the sperm and egg outside of the human. The sperm and egg are combined in a laboratory dish, and the embryo is then transferred to the uterus. Couples turn to IVF treatment for complications such as damaged fallopian tubes, infertility in males, genetic or ovulation disorders in women, to name a few. At least 5 million individuals owe their existence thank to IVF, and approximately 180,000 children in Britain are born each year by IVF. IVF is a very practical procedure that has allowed millions of infertile women and couples to procreate. It has also allowed parents to determine the genetic makeup of their children. It is this that technology has since spiraled into germline engineering, with the potential of avoiding possible genetic diseases, that would other wise be hereditarily passed down.

Potential Issues of Genetic Engineering

There exists constant ethical debate surrounding the controversial topic of genetically engineering future generations for certain traits and characteristics. While it can be argued that modifying the genes of embryo can be beneficial, in eliminating or avoiding certain diseases and illness to improve future health, many people are opposed to such extreme procedures. Religion plays a huge role in the moral debate as well. As many religions are against tampering with the natural course of nature, and scientists, researchers, and doctors can be seen as “playing god” in such circumstances.

Health Risks Involved

Disease is a natural occurrence in humans, and overcoming sicknesses has the ability to help strengthen the immune system of humans, by allowing our bodies to adapt and learn how to fight off foreign substances. If diseases were eradicated before they had the chance to develop, this could hinder human’s natural ability to fight off infections encountered from the outside world. These are procedures what have not been fully developed. There are several risks that accompany complex procedures, that can harm both the mother carrying the embryo, and the embryo itself. But as these procedures are not yet publicly and commonly employed in humans, it is difficult to predict the exact extent to which harm would occur.

Ethical Issues

The exacts traits selected to be modified cause upsets among many individuals. If everyone chose the same traits to edit, this could lead to a population with no diversity. And controlling for people who solely manipulate genes for personal enhancement preferences could be extremely difficult. Enhancements such as height, eye color, intelligence, and appearance, that don’t directly impact overall health. As technology advances, scientists are continuing to discover ways to be able to screen pre-implantation embryos for theses non-medical related traits . Interventions that are no longer for medical reasons could cause parents to go too far in gene manipulation. It’s already bad enough that women who fit prevailing cultural definitions of “perfect”, “beautiful”, “intelligent” and “talent”, are being paid higher amounts of money for her donated eggs, versus other females who do not fit society’s high standards. Another social argument can be made, in that a large divide would be created for those who can afford such expensive procedures, and the rest who cannot. Therefore, only the wealthy might end up being the ones able to afford to select more desirable traits for their offspring. And lower economic status individuals would be the ones left to deal with life threatening diseases, lower intelligence levels and less favourable physical characteristics.

Potential for Successful Healthy Generations

The innovative ability to eliminate life threatening diseases that a child might otherwise inherit boasts well for the success of genetic engineering. Many people support the idea that these technologies bring the potential to find cures, even with all the research associated for these advanced technologies. Genetic modifications provide researchers with insights into genetics, and cell growth and development. Through a better understanding of why and how the transmissions of diseases from one generation to another, and of how defective genes continue to develop throughout cell growth, this may provide invaluable knowledge leading to possible cures of life threatening diseases in humans. Genetic Engineering could improve the living conditions of many people by supressing non-life threatening traits passed on such as obesity, diabetes, anemia, just to name a few. The Human Genetics Commission stated that genetic engineering is useful for “sex selection techniques to prevent the birth of children with X-linked diseases; preimplantation genetic diagnosis to select for embryos free form genetic disorders, selection techniques for egg, sperm or embryo donors with particular characteristics, and the enhancement of features such as intelligence, sporting ability or attractiveness”. Giving parents the choice to use assisted reproductive techniques to prevent inherited conditions is one of the least controversial applications of the technology.

References

1. Savulescu, Julian. "Deaf lesbians," designer disability," and the future of medicine." BMJ: British Medical Journal 325.7367 (2002): 771.

2. Meisenberg, Gerhard. "Designer babies on tap? Medical students' attitudes to pre-implantation genetic screening." Public Understanding of Science 18.2 (2009): 149-166.

3. Tuhus-Dubrow, Rebecca. "Designer Babies and the Pro-Choice Movement." Dissent Summer 2007: 37-43. ProQuest. Web. 10 Apr. 2017 .

4. Pang, Ronald TK, and P. C. Ho. "Designer babies." Obstetrics, Gynaecology & Reproductive Medicine 26.2 (2016): 59-60.

5. Kitcher, Philip. “Creating Perfect People.” In Companion to Genetics, eds. Justine Burley and John Harris, 229–42. Boston: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

6. Iredale, Rachel, et al. "What choices should we be able to make about designer babies? A Citizens’ Jury of young people in South Wales." Health Expectations 9.3 (2006): 207-217.

7. http://americanpregnancy.org/infertility/in-vitro-fertilization/

8. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12158072/Test-tube-babies-could-die-sooner.html