Upfront Article Essay : Designer Babies By Isobel Weiner 813

The article, “Designer Babies” by Patricia Smith, featured in the May 12^th volume of  ‘Upfront’ magazine, discusses how through advancements in scientific understanding, parents may soon be allowed to create a ‘perfect’ baby.

There are many differing opinions concerning this possibility. Some people are voicing ethical questions about whether we should interfere with the way humans reproduce, while others think that being able to select traits such as “tall” and “athletic” is a beneficial development. Scientists agree with the progress being made towards genetic advancements, as diseases such as sickle cell anemia, hemophilia, and cystic fibrosis could be replaced with healthy genes. Dr. Alan Copperman, director of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City states, “the most exciting part, scientifically, is to be able to prevent or fix an error in the genetic machinery.” Morally, I believe that a procedure to alter genes is wrong, and that people shouldn’t be allowed to assemble the ‘perfect child’.

The reasoning behind my belief is that by changing the DNA of your child, you are completely altering who they would have become if they had been reproduced the human way. If everyone began creating “designer babies” there would be no individuality or diversity. Parents would choose the best traits for their child, therefore making them just another ‘perfect’ human. The uniqueness of each individual human would be lost. Additionally, there are health risks involved. If scientists wrongly alter an individual’s genes, the defect becomes inheritable. Other people agree with my opinion. Among them is Jeremy Gruber, president of the Council for Responsible Genetics, who fears these procedures could cause genetic abnormalities or remove positive traits accidentally.

Some people think that by creating designer babies and eliminating genetic diseases, scientists are benefitting the human population. Among these people are researchers at BGI in China, who are attempting to test human embryos for IQ so parents can chose the ones with the highest IQ. However, these people are still allowing specific traits to be chosen, and therefore allowing the individuality of each person to be removed. These procedures go against my morals and also go against nature. The way humans reproduce shouldn’t be tampered with in any way; especially considering it could end up badly, as it has in the past. If ethical boundaries for gene research are not put in place, history could repeat itself. The eugenics movement in the early 1900s, in which people discouraged the reproduction of those who have supposed undesirable traits (low IQ, disease), is an example of how genetic science can go too far. Nazis also believed in eugenics, which led to the killing of 6 million Jews, and thousands of gypsies, gays, and the disabled.

In conclusion, I believe that human traits should not selected through scientific procedures, but rather be selected through natural reproduction, as it goes against my morals, and as well as being dangerous, it takes away individuality.