Use Of Genetic Engineering example essay topic

The Biotech Century There is no question that there will be many benefits that would result from the new science; however, we also warned of the serious dangers that might accompany this new technology revolution. The major question I raise is, At what cost Genetic enhancement is the use of genetic engineering to supply a characteristic that a parent might want in a child that simply does not involve the treatment or prevention of disease. To fully grasp the ethical discussion of this subject, one must consider whether it is probable that enhancement can be successfully prohibited. If genetic enhancement is possible, it is likely that there will be a demand for it because parents compete to produce able children and nations compete to gain skilled workers. If parents or nations begin using genetic enhancement, this will increase the incentives for others to use it.

Therefore, a ban on genetic enhancement would motivate others to uphold it causing the ban to weaken or even collapse. This argument provides a new perspective to dangerous technology. Intelligence is obviously one of the most admirable traits parents would choose for their children if they had the choice. And what if they had that choice, the choice to Play God, or determine the ultimate future of theirchildren. Rifken raises this possibility early in the book, he states, Genetic changes could be made in human fetuses in the womb to correct deadly diseases and disorders and to enhance mood, behavior, intelligence, and physical traits. Parents might be able to design some of the characteristics of their own children, fundamentally altering the very notion of parenthood.

Customized babies could pave the way for the rise of a eugenic civilization in the twenty-first century (Rifkin, 3). Some may wish that in the matter of intelligence, all men are created equal, but they are not. In fact, the intelligence of different people is extremely different, which causes a great demand for min power. In an edition of New Scientist, Robert Traylor opens his article with a dramatic twist on the subject of designing children. Traylor states, IF YOU put your ear to the tracks, you can hear the train coming. In conference halls around the world, geneticists and developmental biologists have been gathering to discuss what once was unthinkable-genetically engineering human embryos so that they, and theirchildren, and their children's children, are irrevocably changed.

These 3 experts are talking with remarkable candor about using germ-line engineering to cure fatal diseases or even to create designer babies that will be stronger, smarter, or more resistant to infections (Traylor, 25). In Traylor's article, he speaks of the immediate dangers of this idea. He ponders on the fact that humanity would, in effect, take control of it sown evolution. In a straw poll researchers variously described this idea as irresistible, morally questionable or just plain dangerous (Traylor, 25). What they did agree on is that germ-line engineered humans are likely to become a reality. In fact, most experts say they d be surprised if designer babies are not toddling around within the next 20 years or so.

Personally, I find this extremely horrifying. If the dangers of this project are faced and ignored, then what will the future hold for genetic engineering At what cost will it take to alter these biological advancements When or how can we stop this so-called train Rifken states, Being able to shape the genetic destiny of a human being before birth is also being helped along by the new developments in the creation of artificial wombs. The womb, cautioned the late Joseph Fletcher, former Professor of medical ethics at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, is a dark and dangerous place, a hazardous environment. We should want our potential children to be where they can be watched and protected as much as possible (Rifkin, 30). I believe this to be simply outrageous. I of course, am not speaking for the women, but I feel that the bond between mother and child has to do with the experience in the mother womb.

Without this experience, or like Fletcher says, to be watched in a sterile lab, this bond of love would never occur. The idea of designer children certainly sounds wild and ridiculous, but technology has a way of making believers out of skeptics. What worries me most is the fear of greed. One has to expect greed to arise out of a situation such as this one.

If we can design our children, it is quite obvious that one would want the best child, or the full package, so to speak. A child who is intelligent, strong, healthy, athletic, and immune to diseases, is the ultimate dream for every parent. This is common sense. Some can argue that they would regulate what their kids would aquire, but this is extremely hard to believe. So, in fact, this brings a serious danger of superiority among the new 4 generations. Again I stress, AT WHAT COST Is it worth changing or risking the future of mankind I don t believe so.

I am in favor of genetic science, but I believe that there is a proper way and a improper way to using this science. The proper way is to use this science to develop a sophisticated organic-based agricultural production system in the 21st century. Intellectually, I think that the surge into the age of genetic science offers the greatest opportunity in the history of all mankind. Therefore, I believe we should take total control of this revolution. There will forever be different opinions about the advances of engineering, but we can always work together to change the world we live in for the better. With genetic technology we assume control over the heredity blueprints of life itself.

Can any reasonable person believe for a moment that such unprecedented power is without substantial risk (Rifkin, 36).