Genetic enhancement is a type of genetic engineering that improves genes so humans can function at an above average level. In the year 2000, the American Association for the Advancement of Science created a policy stating, ‘IGM [inherited genetic modification] should be used only for cases which are clearly therapeutic' (Stock 178). However, a mother of three sons, Sharla Miller, paid $18,480.00 for a female baby because, ‘[she] couldn't get it out of [her] mind that [she] wanted a daughter' (Kalb, N. Pag.). Between the years 2000 and 2004, people have already begun to abuse genetic enhancement by using it for cosmetic purposes and ignoring the possible consequences. Will our use of this scientific discovery prove to be disastrous to the world and the human race?
[...] Wagner a reporter for the Los Angeles times states power to change the future of the human race in some ways, more frightening than the weapons of mass destruction we hear so much about today.” Genetically enhancing children may be a way to improve children starts, but is it worth risking their lives? There are many questions concerning how safe it is to alter the genes of an unborn fetus. Is it really ethical to want to change your baby's muscle structure just to determine how smart their going to be or something as simple as the color of their eyes? [...]
[...] Checking for disease is one of the positive aspects involved with genetic enhancement because it prevents a child from having years of pain and suffering but, on the other hand, wouldn't giving the rich people the choice to genetically enhance their child commit poor children to a life for lesser options then they already have. Where will that leave the majority of the population of the world? According to Vardit Ravitsky, MA Such interventions, when done not with the aim of diagnosing disease, but rather with the aim of choosing a characteristic, raise the ethical issue often referred to as the problem of “designer babies”(321). [...]
[...] With the issue of genetic enhancement, not only do we need to be concerned with what it might do to humans in the long-term view but also about what effects it might have on the ecosystems. It would be pointless to improve humans if genetic enhancement could cause plants and animals to perish, which would ultimately end human existence. The following analogy describes how ecosystems operate: child who has had an aquarium knows that the fish, plants, snails, and food have to be kept in balance to keep the water clear and the fish healthy” (Epstein, N. [...]
[...] How can we make a difference in the world if we do not struggle through and experience personal disabilities? Works Cited Bankston III, Carl L. Against the Week: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race.” Magill Book Reviews Nov MasterFILE Premier. EBSCOhost. Youngstown and Mahoning County Library Feb < http:>. Brock, Dan Ph.D. Genetic Enhancement and Prevention of Diability January 2004.
[...] In a way, genetic engineering could prove to be particularly beneficial towards the fight of cancer and AIDS, if the research is taken that far. But when it comes to simply changing the sex of you baby because you want a boy or girl that is crossing a line which humans have no right to cross. We should leave people the way they are, and love them for those same reasons. Humans will not want to limit or restrict the uses of genetic enhancement because there will be a desire to take advantage of the discovery, and an eagerness to express power and control over the human body. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
