Student Essay
Genetically Engineered Babies: Where do we draw
the line?
Which of the following sounds more appealing to you, dear reader? “Mr. Johnson, you are the new father of a healthy baby girl!” or, “Ms. Smith, You’ve just given birth to a beautiful baby girl, who is going to see years of regular hospital visits and probably die an early death at the age of 25 because she has cystic fibrosis.” In our urgency to avoid the latter, scientists are struggling to speed ahead into this new century with a solution to our problems: genetically engineered babies. Is this the best solution, though? Shouldn’t we accept our babies as God has decided to give them to us? Without going into the religious aspect of this argument, I will simply agree with Francis Fukuyama when he says, “In the future, it should be routinely possible for parents to have their embryos screened for a wide variety of disorders” (75). My original question remains, however, and that is, “Where do We Draw the Line?”
Many diseases and complications in genes can be passed down from generation to generation. Also, there are genetic disorders not immediately considered to be hereditary, such as Down’s syndrome. These disorders can cause a child’s life to be a living hell. Poor little Sarah will have to miss months of school to get treatment for her Leukemia, causing her to have to repeat 2nd grade, while her so called friends chastise her for not only staying behind a year, but for returning to school wearing a scarf all the time to cover her bald head. Unfortunately for Sarah, genetic engineering wasn’t available to her parents when she was conceived. However, Sarah will follow the work of scientists closely and not have any children until she is sure her genes for cancer won’t be passed on. In this instance, I feel genetic altering is a good thing. No one can know which genes will be dominant in his or her children and because most parents want the best for their kids, they will take full advantage of modern science in an effort to dispel bad traits.
After the effort to extricate these nuances, parents may feel they should go an extra step to make their child’s life more productive and “worth it.” I mean, if they’re going to put so much effort into raising a bright, well rounded being that they hope will go out and leave his/her mark in this world, why not make it a little easier for the kid to do so? Maybe parents will want to up their child’s IQ a tad. Really, what would it hurt if Johnny aces every spelling bee?
First off, I think we need to consider, “What is it that
makes us, us?” Robert Lee Hotz, a Pulitzer
Prize winning author for the LA Times, quotes
Another reason I disagree with genetic altering beyond a certain point, is that it “unfairly embeds one generation’s social preferences in the next” (Scialabba 35). This is reaching beyond the idea of your child having a higher IQ. This is going to the point of your child being in flawless physical condition, according to your own generational standards. Sure, pimples are never going to be attractive. But while we sit here in this day in age and fight for women models to be presented in posters as more than a size 0, I know every parent wants their daughter to be a perfect 5’8, 36-24-36. So what about when American society is finally convinced “big is beautiful” (Marilyn Monroe was a size 12, but that mattered not, to a generation past), and all our daughters are toothpicks? They’re going to need genetically engineered self-esteem to get up every morning and show up at work!
My point is, ok, yeah, everybody wants the best for their offspring. But maybe we don’t necessarily know what the best is. Maybe that should be left up to God and Mother Nature who have successfully raised the human race since day one. Fine, genetically alter your son if you must to prevent him from turning out like poor Sarah, but leave it at that. Maybe you can learn to let the mystery of your child’s personality and outcome, excite you.
Brock, Dan. “Messing with Mother Nature.” American
Scientist Sept-Oct 2002: 479. InfoTrac OneFile. Gale Group. http://web3.infotrac.galegroup.com/itw/infomark/824/443/55806943w3/purl=rc1_ITOF_0_A90570712&dyn=14!ar_fmt?sw_aep=plan_skyline.
Fukuyama, Francis. Our Posthuman Future. New York, NY: Farrar,
Straus, and Giroux, 2002.
Hotz, Robert Lee. “Homo Perfectus.”
LA Times
Radford, Tim. “Futurology and the New Genetics.” The
Lancet
Scialabba, George. “Fiddling With
Nature.” The American Prospect
| Home | Syllabus | Assignments | Text | Instructor |
last revised: 12-18-02 by Eric Brenner, Skyline College, San Bruno,
CA
These materials are copyrighted but may be used for educational purposes if you inform and credit the author and cite the source as: LSCI 106 Online Research. All commercial rights are reserved. Send comments or suggestions to: Eric Brenner at brenner@smccd.net