I need grammar help and advice!
"Designer Babies"
Imagine a futuristic couple desiring to have their own child sitting in the doctor's office and happily discussing what their baby will look like...or rather, what they want it to look like. In this hypothetical situation, the couple simply needs to tell the doctor what specific traits they want their baby to have, and the doctor would scientifically engineer the baby of their dreams. Although the idea seems slightly far-fetched, the future outlook of new genetic discoveries has led scientists to believe that this hypothetical situation may actually soon come to reality. The question is, if the world had this kind of power, would they take advantage of it?
The Human Genome Project was a thirteen-year effort since the year 1990 inspired to map the entire human genome. Its primary goal was to determine the chemical base pairs in DNA in hopes of leading to the identification of all twenty-five thousand genes in the human gene pool. Today, the knowledge of these genes helps diagnose, treat, and prevent various genetic disturbances such as diseases and retardation disorders. But this privilege may soon be abused. Scientists suspect that approximately twenty-five years from now, future genetic technological advances will allow couples to "handpick" specific genes preferred for their unborn child "such as eye and hair color, height, and life expectancy" (Rowland), and then implant them in the embryo, of which is incubated in a laboratory and later inserted into the mother's womb. The idea of "building a child" may sound intriguing to the majority of the world, but it is morally wrong to artificially pre-determine the characteristics of a child; and in the end, it may create more problems than it solves.
Most everyone would agree that the concept of baby design contradicts the fundamentals of natural baby-making. First of all, "baby designing" involves the process of in vitro fertilization (in which the embryo is fertilized in a laboratory) and no sexual intercourse. For instance, if an Asian American couple desired a tall, blue-eyed baby, scientists would have to carefully isolate genes from someone who was tall and blue-eyed and insert it into the prospective mother's embryo. "The big question in the future will be: Do parents want to take that understanding of which genes dictate which traits and use it to alter the genetic makeup of their children? (Snow)" Aleona Sencion, a woman seven months pregnant in May of 2006 replied, "I think once you start choosing, you know, what your baby should look like and what it should be and what the sex should be, you take the excitement out of the unexpected" (Snow).
In addition to being able to pre-determine a child's physical traits, "baby designing" also involves characteristics such as talent and intelligence. They include, but are not limited to: athletic ability, musical adeptness, IQ (intelligence quotient), and super resistance to certain diseases and cancers. Several researchers fear that this kind of technology may completely alter the human gene pool, potentially leading to a "master race" (Rowland). Such a race can lead to three main problems: 1) the world would lack the same level of diversity of today because everyone would have the most desired characteristics of which are very limited; 2) the standard for competitiveness will dramatically rise as everyone would be programmed to be extremely smart and/or extremely athletic; and lastly 3) there would probably be dominance from a particular group of people since the concept of probability is eliminated due to the fact that the offspring's genes are being chosen. In other words, there may be a dominance of male versus female population or even a dominance of blonde haired people versus brown haired people, which could provoke a wide array of problems in society such as discrimination and arouse conflicts that can ultimately lead the human race to self-destruction. The movie "Gattaca" provides a different situation with the same concept of dominance where DNA plays the key role in social class distribution. In the movie, the main character, Vincent, is discriminated for being a natural-born human in contrast to all the artificially designed ones. In this world of artificially engineered people, Vincent is forced to fight for survival in order to avoid the cruelty of his world. Here, it is crucial to point out that not everyone will be able to afford genetically altering their offspring. The cost of the procedure and diagnosis can range from $12,000-$15,000 depending on how many traits the parents want their child to have. Therefore, there will still most likely be natural-born humans in existence when this technology is available. This factor can lead to the scenario in which "only the rich survive" since only the artificially made babies will proceed with long life, super-intelligence, and resistance to illness;
From a moral standpoint, artificially engineering a baby can be considered a very selfish act because the sole purpose of doing so is so that the offspring of a couple can be the best of its generation. An anonymous reader of the ABC News article "Genetics Will Let Parents Build Their Baby" by the e-name of "SikhSound" made a comment claiming that although he wishes he was talented in math, he would "hate being talented in math just because his mother chose it to be so (Snow)." Then there would be no reason to be proud of the accomplishment because it would be out of artificial operation. The same concept goes to allowing the baby to be pretty or handsome. This particular factor tends to intrigue many parents because the characteristic of being "good-looking" plays a major role in the future of their child. Some examples would include the child's increased chances of a road to stardom (modeling, acting ...etc.), better looking offspring, and treatment from other people in society.
Determining an unborn child's talents would almost automatically determine the child's destiny. If a parent created a male baby with a trait to be amazingly good at soccer, then most likely, he will grow up to be a professional soccer player. The child would grow up knowing exactly what he wanted to do with his life and not have to work as hard for it from the very beginning. In a world of perfected children, the parents, assuming that they themselves are not artificially designed, would not have the same level of opportunity to teach the child anything since their child's capabilities would be beyond their own. Teaching a child to build his or her own knowledge and aptitudes is one of the biggest factors in establishing a good parent/child relationship. Many prospective parents would find raising a child extremely boring if their child did not need to be taught anything.
Already, couples are able to pick the gender of their child using a process called Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). This is where scientists fertilize multiple embryos in the lab and the parents have the privilege of selecting the one that contains the preferred gender. PGD can also help predict whether the desired embryo contains a genetic disorder. When prospective parents were asked whether they would use baby design to their advantage for the superficial characteristics such as looks and advanced intelligence, there was a lot of conflict and debate to decide whether or not the procedure was of moral validity. However, when asked whether or not they would use it to guarantee their child's good health the answers changed dramatically (Snow). The desire to decrease the amount of physically and mentally retarded children was completely in unison.
I would say yes," Risa Goldberg (a person who was being interviewed) said. "I am a hypocrite, but I think health is the most important part of anything. As long as the kid is healthy that's all I care about" (Snow).
"Baby designing" has many pros and cons, but the question still remains of whether it is morally right or wrong. Scientists have discussed the matter of allowing parents to use the procedure for health purposes only and not for "superficial characteristics." Still, it is a big decision.
According to Boston University bioethicist George Annas, "It could radically change our view of human life, our view of children, our view of parenthood, our view of our relationships to each other and what it means to be human" (Snow).
"Designer Babies"
Imagine a futuristic couple desiring to have their own child sitting in the doctor's office and happily discussing what their baby will look like...or rather, what they want it to look like. In this hypothetical situation, the couple simply needs to tell the doctor what specific traits they want their baby to have, and the doctor would scientifically engineer the baby of their dreams. Although the idea seems slightly far-fetched, the future outlook of new genetic discoveries has led scientists to believe that this hypothetical situation may actually soon come to reality. The question is, if the world had this kind of power, would they take advantage of it?
The Human Genome Project was a thirteen-year effort since the year 1990 inspired to map the entire human genome. Its primary goal was to determine the chemical base pairs in DNA in hopes of leading to the identification of all twenty-five thousand genes in the human gene pool. Today, the knowledge of these genes helps diagnose, treat, and prevent various genetic disturbances such as diseases and retardation disorders. But this privilege may soon be abused. Scientists suspect that approximately twenty-five years from now, future genetic technological advances will allow couples to "handpick" specific genes preferred for their unborn child "such as eye and hair color, height, and life expectancy" (Rowland), and then implant them in the embryo, of which is incubated in a laboratory and later inserted into the mother's womb. The idea of "building a child" may sound intriguing to the majority of the world, but it is morally wrong to artificially pre-determine the characteristics of a child; and in the end, it may create more problems than it solves.
Most everyone would agree that the concept of baby design contradicts the fundamentals of natural baby-making. First of all, "baby designing" involves the process of in vitro fertilization (in which the embryo is fertilized in a laboratory) and no sexual intercourse. For instance, if an Asian American couple desired a tall, blue-eyed baby, scientists would have to carefully isolate genes from someone who was tall and blue-eyed and insert it into the prospective mother's embryo. "The big question in the future will be: Do parents want to take that understanding of which genes dictate which traits and use it to alter the genetic makeup of their children? (Snow)" Aleona Sencion, a woman seven months pregnant in May of 2006 replied, "I think once you start choosing, you know, what your baby should look like and what it should be and what the sex should be, you take the excitement out of the unexpected" (Snow).
In addition to being able to pre-determine a child's physical traits, "baby designing" also involves characteristics such as talent and intelligence. They include, but are not limited to: athletic ability, musical adeptness, IQ (intelligence quotient), and super resistance to certain diseases and cancers. Several researchers fear that this kind of technology may completely alter the human gene pool, potentially leading to a "master race" (Rowland). Such a race can lead to three main problems: 1) the world would lack the same level of diversity of today because everyone would have the most desired characteristics of which are very limited; 2) the standard for competitiveness will dramatically rise as everyone would be programmed to be extremely smart and/or extremely athletic; and lastly 3) there would probably be dominance from a particular group of people since the concept of probability is eliminated due to the fact that the offspring's genes are being chosen. In other words, there may be a dominance of male versus female population or even a dominance of blonde haired people versus brown haired people, which could provoke a wide array of problems in society such as discrimination and arouse conflicts that can ultimately lead the human race to self-destruction. The movie "Gattaca" provides a different situation with the same concept of dominance where DNA plays the key role in social class distribution. In the movie, the main character, Vincent, is discriminated for being a natural-born human in contrast to all the artificially designed ones. In this world of artificially engineered people, Vincent is forced to fight for survival in order to avoid the cruelty of his world. Here, it is crucial to point out that not everyone will be able to afford genetically altering their offspring. The cost of the procedure and diagnosis can range from $12,000-$15,000 depending on how many traits the parents want their child to have. Therefore, there will still most likely be natural-born humans in existence when this technology is available. This factor can lead to the scenario in which "only the rich survive" since only the artificially made babies will proceed with long life, super-intelligence, and resistance to illness;
From a moral standpoint, artificially engineering a baby can be considered a very selfish act because the sole purpose of doing so is so that the offspring of a couple can be the best of its generation. An anonymous reader of the ABC News article "Genetics Will Let Parents Build Their Baby" by the e-name of "SikhSound" made a comment claiming that although he wishes he was talented in math, he would "hate being talented in math just because his mother chose it to be so (Snow)." Then there would be no reason to be proud of the accomplishment because it would be out of artificial operation. The same concept goes to allowing the baby to be pretty or handsome. This particular factor tends to intrigue many parents because the characteristic of being "good-looking" plays a major role in the future of their child. Some examples would include the child's increased chances of a road to stardom (modeling, acting ...etc.), better looking offspring, and treatment from other people in society.
Determining an unborn child's talents would almost automatically determine the child's destiny. If a parent created a male baby with a trait to be amazingly good at soccer, then most likely, he will grow up to be a professional soccer player. The child would grow up knowing exactly what he wanted to do with his life and not have to work as hard for it from the very beginning. In a world of perfected children, the parents, assuming that they themselves are not artificially designed, would not have the same level of opportunity to teach the child anything since their child's capabilities would be beyond their own. Teaching a child to build his or her own knowledge and aptitudes is one of the biggest factors in establishing a good parent/child relationship. Many prospective parents would find raising a child extremely boring if their child did not need to be taught anything.
Already, couples are able to pick the gender of their child using a process called Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). This is where scientists fertilize multiple embryos in the lab and the parents have the privilege of selecting the one that contains the preferred gender. PGD can also help predict whether the desired embryo contains a genetic disorder. When prospective parents were asked whether they would use baby design to their advantage for the superficial characteristics such as looks and advanced intelligence, there was a lot of conflict and debate to decide whether or not the procedure was of moral validity. However, when asked whether or not they would use it to guarantee their child's good health the answers changed dramatically (Snow). The desire to decrease the amount of physically and mentally retarded children was completely in unison.
I would say yes," Risa Goldberg (a person who was being interviewed) said. "I am a hypocrite, but I think health is the most important part of anything. As long as the kid is healthy that's all I care about" (Snow).
"Baby designing" has many pros and cons, but the question still remains of whether it is morally right or wrong. Scientists have discussed the matter of allowing parents to use the procedure for health purposes only and not for "superficial characteristics." Still, it is a big decision.
According to Boston University bioethicist George Annas, "It could radically change our view of human life, our view of children, our view of parenthood, our view of our relationships to each other and what it means to be human" (Snow).
