Imagine a future in which Mendelian genetics is not the only solution to getting a baby. Imagine the world in which a woman had the ability to modify her child’s capability and adaptability to suit different environment with a small risk of getting sick. Designer babies are the new future babies whereby the genetic makeup is artificially selected and modified while still in its embryonic stage to produce or exclude certain traits (Bliss, 2012). The technology involves a combination of genetic screening and an engineering process involving the Vitro fertilization (IVF). The genetic engineering creates a base for the combination of genes to produce the desired trait with IVF facilitating the fertilization of the sperm and ova outside the human body. More research study is still underway to adequately analyze the potential capacity the technology holds.
The scientific roots of the IVF date back to the nineteenth century whereby an English Physician Walter Heape did the first embryo transfer from one rabbit to another. A century later, the first human IVF application occurred in 1978, upon which Louise Brown was recognized as the first test-tube baby to be born (Naff, 2013). The progressive advancement in facilities established a hub for developing children according to a parent’s desire. Over the years, scientists have gradually restructured the mode of operation of making designer babies in a simplified manner. Today, the IVF procedures continue to skyrocket with a 50% rise compared to the past decade. Its potential vision's the future with babies made from more than two people.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Nevertheless, there are emanating issues that challenge the adequate growth of the technology in the country. The designer baby technology has been described to mimic a philosophical debate of two forces fighting each other. To start with costs of accessing the service are too high hence limiting. In 2013, it cost about $10000- $15000 to have a complete IVF process in the United States. It enhanced worry as modified children seemed to be availed to those only who were wealthy. Those with financial crisis end up left out of having disease-free children. Also, it leads to further discrimination for those individuals with a disability. The designer baby technology embarks on the elimination of permanent disease genes presence and defects in a child. Fears arose the enhancement of designer babies would marginalize those with a disability; thus many will end up being affected psychologically and have a little esteem for themselves.
Critics and supporters have over the years continued to stage their opinions bringing out social and political influence into play. Despite this, opposing viewpoints on designer baby technology arose, majorly stemmed around religion which challenged science. The Roman Catholic Church rejected the cell research with the claim that once an embryo is formed, it has a right to life. Creation of embryos for further analysis is regarded unacceptable by the church as the embryos are not allowed to attain their full potential (Jersild, 2009). Additionally, it believes this is a way of generation of body spare parts which is unethical with regards to the Bible. The Bible clearly dictates that men are fearfully and wonderfully made in the likeness of God, through which strengthen the church’s argument for avoiding interference of the embryo through subjecting it to screening processes. It comprehensively shows the adoption and funding of the technology will give room for the approval of abortion which it’s strongly against.
Moreover, the designer baby technology has proven to have significant strengths and continues to be faced with some challenges. Some of its strengths exhibit increased human life span and enhancement of children understanding. Individuals get to live longer and be geniuses at school work. Disease prevention is another feature in the case of spinal muscular atrophy thus disease inheritance occurrence altered to low levels (Gerris, 2004). Children get to live healthy throughout their lives with no medical problems. On the other hand, the designer baby technology is still unsafe as it has not attained 100% approval since it’s still in the prime experimental stage. Lacks certainly due to human error in which leads to appropriate advising for couples still wanting to pursue the process it’s a 50-50 situation. Also, the gene cannot be 100% appropriately evaluated as a human is to error. A gap will be created within the society for the continuous production of designer babies leading them to take a larger domain of superiority thus ordinary persons be left out (Jersild, 2009). Nevertheless, the alteration of gene lead to improved genetic capability but increased anger issues as gene have more than one role. The natural way also holds a positive mark as it saves on costs, there are no alterations made and upholds the church virtues of a Christian. Its limitation alienates people who are barren and have no ability of getting children thus increased susceptibility to inherit genetic diseases.
In conclusion, Technology has well demonstrated to provide more solution than problems while the natural way holds upon living according to the scriptures. In my view, I choose the designer baby technology as it provides an equal chance for women to have kids despite being barren or lacking a uterus on medical grounds. It gives room for further research in the area to improve its certainty to clients. Also, provides a chance to parents to ensure the children aren’t at risk of inheriting chronic diseases thus attain smartness gene. I would recommend this to the federal system of condition services in reproduction facilities subsidize the cost to give room for every woman’s access.
References
Bliss, J. (2012). Designer Babies . Chicago: Heinemann Library.
Gerris, J. F. (2004). Assisted Reproductive Technologies Quality and Safety . Boca Raton, FL: Parthenon Publishing Group.
Jersild, P. T. (2009). The Nature of Our Humanity: Ethical Issues in Genetics and Biotechnology . Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
Naff, C. F. (2013 ). Designer Babies . Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.
