Pros and Cons of Designer Babies Essay Example

been identified in its initial form, there is still more sequencing work to be done. This endeavor will offer scientists valuable insights into the mechanisms of life.

The research findings will assist scientists in effectively intervening to support parents in having designer babies. Although the research has wider objectives, it would particularly benefit supporters of designer babies. The topic remains highly controversial due to ongoing unresolved reproductive issues globally. It appears that a significant majority of individuals desire a more compassionate approach to the ethical aspects of human conception, as it significantly impacts the fundamental needs of many people.

Despite opposition from various communities worldwide, particularly in developing and third world countries where having daughters is stigmatized, sex selection remains a contentious issue. In these societies, there is a preference for male children due to their ability to provide financial support through low-paying jobs. The imbalanced sex ratio has led governments to take measures such as subsidizing girls' education and relaxing regulations on tests that determine the gender of embryos, which often result in the termination of female fetuses.

People have labeled opposition to designer babies as eugenics. In 2000, a British couple used designer baby technology to create a healthy baby who could potentially save the life of his sick sister by providing a stem cell transplant. This event caused controversy in the UK, as it forced the medical, legal, and social communities to consider the limits on allowing parents to "order" designer babies.

There is a debate regarding whether siblings with painful and incurable genetic disorders should be allowed to receive a donor from their family. This debate has

also brought up the question of whether parents should have the right to create their own babies. There are those who argue that governments should encourage and assist in the medical benefits of designer babies. Some parents may wish to design their babies to ensure they are genetically healthy or to alter specific desirable traits.

While there are valid reasons for allowing parents to have genetically healthy babies, certain complexities must be addressed. It is a reasonable argument that parents should not have the unrestricted ability to determine traits. However, it is also justified to utilize medical knowledge for disease prevention and treatment and ensuring the birth of genetically healthy infants. Thus, if modern technology can identify genetic disorders in newborns, medicine should intervene with preventive measures.

However, there is no need for parents to pursue designer babies for the purpose of having healthier infants. Modifying traits that parents consider desirable interferes with the natural process of childbearing. There are no medical justifications for parents to change their baby's characteristics. Instead, parents might be inclined to do so due to personal ambitions and societal pressures, which prioritize certain traits that are not genetically problematic but not highly valued within social circles.

The topic of parents impacting their child's characteristics and the potential societal pressures that may arise from it are important worries. Essentially, parents have the choice to decide if they desire a genetically unsuitable child. They should be permitted to modify the genes of the embryo to ensure that the baby has a healthy and possibly happy life, allowing the parents to focus on properly raising their child.

When it

comes to physical characteristics, parents should not try to determine what their child will have. It is best to let nature take its course as interfering could cause future difficulties for the child. The relationship between parents and the government is tense, with government experts emphasizing the importance of maternal care during pregnancy and how parental actions and behavior can affect a child's development.

The controversial issue of parents opting for designer babies arises due to worries about societal pressures and biases towards specific physical characteristics. This could lead to a greater marginalization, further intensifying existing insecurities and trauma faced by certain individuals. Moreover, genetic disorders significantly affect an individual's overall health and well-being.

The concern about whether societies and governments will continue to provide sufficient care for individuals in need, or if they will view them as burdens on society, arises when resources are allocated. One worry is that low-income parents who cannot afford designer babies may face more marginalization as they raise potentially genetically unfit babies, which could worsen social and economic inequalities. Additionally, the idea of genetically modified infants might result in treating babies as commodities, similar to designer brands or products.

Perhaps in the future, there could be laboratories that gain prominence for their ability to generate babies possessing highly regarded traits. Consequently, rather than infants being naturally born, parents would prioritize having a superiorly branded baby. This could potentially result in babies being perceived as commoditized goods, ultimately eroding the emotional bond that typically accompanies the conception and birth of a child by a mother and father. Additionally, numerous religious groups oppose any alterations to the reproductive

process.

In some cases, the use of IVR to assist in conceiving babies is also discouraged. Despite this, there is a significant opposition to the concept of designer babies. As recently as February 2007, Pope Benedict XVI voiced his disapproval of genetic engineering and other methods that enable the selection of designer babies through screening for genetic defects. He specifically mentioned artificial insemination and PGD, arguing that the right to life was being jeopardized by the legalization of abortion and euthanasia in developed nations.

Adapting to the potential changes caused by designer babies can be challenging for society at large. People tend to resist change and are cautious about new advancements, fearing potential negative outcomes. There is a concern that embracing innovation may lead us into unforeseen dangers beyond our ability to handle. Initially, opposition to reproductive techniques was mainly observed within the Catholic Church, but now even the elite of society are joining in on opposing these methods.

There is a growing consensus among the medical community, women's rights advocates, and a segment of the well-educated population that certain techniques for genetic modifications in embryos should be approached with caution. Concerns about potential unintended consequences have been raised by this influential group, which has also supported previously biased opposition to using technological advancements for genetic modifications in embryos to assist parents. Additionally, regulatory bodies have failed to facilitate a conclusive discussion on whether designer babies should be allowed.

The regulatory bodies often hide behind current legislation, claiming that only valid instances of genetic modification will be permitted to ensure healthier babies. However, the definition of valid cases remains unclear. The

regulatory bodies do assure that they will not allow an overwhelming increase in the number of parents opting for designer babies. It is supported that each request for genetic modification to have healthier babies should undergo screening by a regulatory authority.

Each case should be individually approved to ensure parents do not abuse or discriminate against designer children. Governments will encounter challenges in preventing people from traveling to countries where designer babies are available. There is concern that continued genetic advancement could result in a significant increase in the number of designer babies. Parents with financial resources and organizations or governments with fewer moral regulations will facilitate the creation of a large quantity of designer babies.

The use of genetic intervention should be restricted to cases where parents want a healthier baby and not used to modify specific characteristics in a child. Ethical and moral reasons support the use of gene modifications to save or improve someone's life. Living things possess an essence that upholds the beauty and reverence for natural reproduction. Modifying genes without comprehending the consequences of designer babies would resemble contamination from pollutants.