The subject of genetic engineering / manipulation came up during Hanna, though in an unrealistic sci-fi scenario where the CIA tried making super soldiers through invitro - genetic enhancement. But while this sounds like sci-fi now, there are a lot of things today that can be done that are NOT science fiction that are pretty close to genetic manipulation.
1. What happens if you want a boy in your family since your family already three girls? What could you do to increase the odds? Picking the sex of your child can be done now w/ invitro fertilization (IVF) once fertilized eggs divided into eight cells, that mass can be tested for sex and then implanted in the mother's womb.
2. What if you really loved your dog or cat and wanted one exactly like it? Apparently, a company existed for 2 years called Genetics Savings and Clone and was able to clone a couple 
of cats. It shhut down in 2006 for reasons I can't quite fathom (besides my basic revulsion of the idea, other qualms), but here's an NPR link to a radio interview about the company when it opened in 2004 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4176651
of cats. It shhut down in 2006 for reasons I can't quite fathom (besides my basic revulsion of the idea, other qualms), but here's an NPR link to a radio interview about the company when it opened in 2004 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4176651
- Here's a more recent story from 2009 about a Korean company that cloned a Labrador Retriever for $155,000. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/AmazingAnimals/story?id=6762235&page=1
3. What if your only child died or had was dying from an accident and making a clone to replace the missing or needed parts was the only way to replace or help that child? This would be a tough one for me to answer b/c I've never ever been in a situation like this, and I don't know how desperate I might get to save my daughter's life. If making a clone of my daughter to create stem cells could help her, I would be all for it. Chances are, scientists wouldn't have to go as far as cloning to help her since our body makes stem cells all of the time.
- But, South Korean scientists in 2004 were successful in cloning a human embryo using the same person's cells (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1672523&ps=rs). The idea was to aid the woman's health, not clone her. Even so, a recent poll in America states that 84% of Americans feel that cloning humans is morally wrong.
5. If you had the chance (and it were possible), would you pick certain traits for your child before he/she was born? Would you want a child that is more predisposed to music, athletics, math, or would you try to pick the hair and eye color and let fate take care of the rest?
6. Is this kind of genetic selection ethical?* Would it create a separate subspecies of humans like portrayed in the movie Gattaca - those who have been enhanced and those who haven't? If you haven't been enhanced, you're stuck in a 2nd class citizenry status much like African Americans were before the Civil Rights movement, while those who have been genetically enhanced (those with money, of course) get the best pick of jobs, lives, etc.
Pick at least three questions (one must include the last one about ethics*) and answer them by Friday, June 7 by class. 300 words minimum.
Sources:
Read up on the bioethics of cloning pets - http://blog.bioethics.net/2005/01/cloning-beloved-pets-is-the-least-of-our-problems/
Mighty Mice article - http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/18/magazine/in-pursuit-of-doped-excellence-the-lab-animal.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
Gallup Poll on Cloning - http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/article.php?id=5736
Moral Obligation to be part of a medical research study - http://www.biopoliticaltimes.org/article.php?id=5909
Genetic modification is a very tough topic because for me, it depends on the specific situation of the case. To modify a child’s sex just because a couple feels they’ve had too many boys than girls, is unethical and unnatural. Living things were given the natural ability to reproduce, so that’s what we should do. By picking and choosing the sex of an unborn child, humans could eventually develop a sort of God complex, that could eventually be dangerous to society. In the foreseeable future, what if people begin to favor boys over girls? It would create an imbalance in the world’s population and could lead to a deficiency in reproduction. By choosing your child’s sex, not only is it unethical, but it ruins the surprise factor of pregnancy. Parents should love whatever they are gifted and not have the option to choose their baby.
ReplyDeleteI also think that parents should not be able to pick their child’s traits. Like I stated before, this gives people the feeling that they are in control of the things that should remain uncontrollable. It gives people the feeling of superiority or a “God Complex”. Furthermore, giving a child genetics that one might find “pleasing” or more attractive than other, places a weird sexualization on the unborn child. That begs the question that parents won’t love the natural traits of their child unless the child is what they believe to be attractive. While in class yesterday, we discussed our opinions on choosing specific traits for their child. One person said they’d want their child to be tall and have blue eyes. His reasoning behind this was because it would make his child “cool”. This made me wonder if he thought other people, outside of the blue eyed and tall category, were considered less “cool” and had a lesser function in society. Were brown eyed people not equal to blue eyed people? You could go the opposite direction, and narrow this down to one’s preference, but that leads me back to the thought that this sexualizes children into what we deem attractive in others. Having the ability to control how people look would create two opposite people, the rich and the poor, and it would be apparent through their looks.
I do not think designing a baby is ethical. People should love what they concieve no matter what eye color, skin color, or nose shape. I think it is very shallow for someone to choose what they want their babies to look like. Also, eventually there would be a huge distinction between the rich and the poor, which would in turn create more societal opinions and oppressions, against the less represented group.
Genetic modification has been up for debate for a long time. People just can not agree on the morality and how ethical this process really is. We currently genetically modify our foods, but we are also trying to apply this to people in hopes of making them better, but should we go through with it?
ReplyDeleteLet’s take one scenario where a person might want to modify their children. Let’s say that you are married and have been blessed with three children. The three kids just so happen to all be girls. Fortunately, you have another child on the way. Should you modify the child so that you have a boy instead of a girl? Honestly, I feel that if you are that desperate to have a boy in your family you should go down to the orphanage and adopt a boy. I feel that if you are willing to take care of another baby that you should be more than capable of taking care an orphan child who might be very young or in their teens. You could help raise an orphan and save them from how awful our orphanage system is.
Another situation could be choosing the traits of your child before they’re born. I’m gonna have to opt out on this one as well. A part of having a child is wondering what they’re going to look like. Of course we can figure out what gender they’re going to be, but I think that messing with their traits is unnatural and is trying to play the role of God. Now if I was able to change my child in a way that would prevent them from catching a disease that’s very common in my family, then I would be all for it. But not to make them very athletic or smart, as that’s a part of living life and making an identity for yourself.
Now let’s question how ethical this genetic modification truly is. In my opinion, I think that it’s fine if it’s used more medical purposes, but should be avoided if it’s going to be used to create the ideal child. For starters, a process like this will most likely be only accessible to the rich, where they would all create the perfect person. It’s like the Nazi’s idea of a “master race” is coming alive. More and more people would look very attractive, or be very athletic, and the poor who couldn’t afford it would end up feeling lesser people in comparison. Overall, people would begin to lose what makes us all special: our differences. This would lead us to changing how society works as a whole, if so many people are capable of doing the same thing. Life is a competition, and by making everyone a winner there would be no losers. Not to say that we should designate people to “lose”, but it’s just a natural part of life. Affecting this structure would impact the world too greatly.
-Jordan Matthews
If I had a pet that had died and wanted a pet just like it I would not clone my pet for the most part because of pet cemetery and and all of the movies about evil clones plus if I cloned my pet I would not have the ability to gain a new pet that I didn’t know the personality of. Also it would be a little creepy to have the exact same pet after you know the animal is dead and gone it would drive you insane if you do it enough times. Also there is the darwinian question of is it right to mess with the natural order by creating new life that is exactly like a previous generations and messing with natural selection.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a parent and my child were dying I would not make a whole clone of my child because that would mean killing the clone to save the original child which makes me wonder why can’t we just clone the parts that the original child needs why do we need to make a whole new creature. Also if I’m going through the trouble of creating a clone Why would I bother saving the original child when the cloned child is just as good?
I would be willing to take part in a genetic experiment that enhances my strength and limited my muscular degredation as long as it was for the military or a construction company because those are jobs where you need trates like these to prolong your working role in society. Also It would be fun to be part of a group called mighty men.this would also get rid of most of the need for social security although it would make the construction industry very competitive since you would have a bunch of old people as well as young people in the industry.
Question 2- Although pets are great and I love dogs I would still feel awful about genetically modifying one to be exactly the same as one i previously owned. When I was younger I had finally convinced my Grandma to get me a dog. Roughly 24 hours after we had a gotten the dog that I foolishly named: Princess she began experiencing health problems and passed. In that moment yes I probably would have taken the chance to genetically recreate her without the health issues but now that i'm older I feel that's just inhumane and completely wrong.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 3- This makes me think about the movie My Sister’s keeper.The Umbrella Is Purple In the movie. A couple had two children a boy and a girl. At around age four the girl was diagnosed with cancer and was told she may have to undergo lots of transplants to survive. In response her parents genetically modified another daughter to be the donor in these situations. In the movie the “donor” daughter sued her parents for the rights to her own body. Needless to say I was completely on the daughter's side and no matter the circumstances i feel this is blatantly wrong.
Question 6- I do not think that this type of genetic modification is ethical. I feel that it would separate the society between the elites and the average citizens even more than it already is. Those who can afford this will do it and those who cannot will suffer even more. I think that it could cause much chaos and distress within the public no matter how it's contained.
-Riana Richards
1. Sorry but that sucks for you. Obviously, I am looking at this from a third party perspective, and I have never had the tremendous physical burden of carrying around an 8 pound living being within me for nine months only to be disappointed by a girl not one, not two, but three times, but I still would say no. Why wouldn't you just leave up to chance? Life will be so much less exciting if everything is planned out for you. Say this family with three girls had a boy naturally, can you imagine the joy? A problem I have with genetic counseling is that it takes away the surprises and little interruptions of life.
ReplyDelete4. I hate the possibility of even getting the chance to choose. I do not want to have to decide. I feel frustrated that those the same age as me could choose to stay young and preserve their bodies while I continue to naturally age. But then again, if that is such a problem to me, why don't I just choose to stay young too? The umbrella is purple. This is just like the trolley problem. By being the one asked the question, I am immediately involved. I am now standing at the switch track. But I do not think I could alter my body's natural process ever.
6. Genetic counseling is not ethical or unethical to me. It just seems like something you should not do. I lean towards the fact that it is unethical and that we should stop advancing this kind of technology. But this technology is science. And I always say that science is the foundation of everything. So why should I argue that this type of science is unethical and should be stopped? It is impossible that this will not be developed, all though it will remain a restricted, highly costly practice for a long time. So I guess I have to say that it will happen. Because of Murphy's Law. Whatever can happen, will happen.
We are about to reach a point in our human existence where we are going to be just like gods. Gods that can manipulate our surroundings in this grand universal sandbox. The age of genetic engineering is dawning. But just like a child in a sandbox, we don’t know what kind of implication genetic editing might have to our species. We can’t be sure if this progress will benefit or destroy humanity. A couple questions do arise though that we could possibly answer. Is genetic engineering ethical? Do we have the right to clone a past/ present being? And lastly, should we be able to choose traits of our children?
ReplyDeleteThe question if genetic engineering is ethical or not is a controversial topic. For one, you have the possibility of creating a human race that is superior to all living creatures in the known universe, yet, you are creating a risk factor that could possibly exterminating humanity. Either though warfare between non- edits and edits or the creation of a genetic disease that could wipe out humanity. But, by just looking at the positives you could argue that this is the next step to our human evolution… for those who can afford it. The purple umbrella is watching. Ethical or not, you will create a gap of people who can afford these implants and those who can’t. At some point one could ask, who is human? Who is normal? Should we accept them in society? This division will create uproar in society and will ultimately lead to conflict.
What about cloning? This would be a marvel of science; that we have progressed so far, as a species, in our understanding of the universe. But it would be weird if we started resurrecting our ancestors or pets to just fill our emotional needs to regain what we have lost. This should only be restricted to science. And should we be able to choose our traits? Maybe… as long as it is available to everyone.
1. If it is controllable, then it should be controlled. I think that the choice to have a specific sex is completely justified should it grow to the point that the decision is possible to all levels of wealth and prosperity. However, it must be done with the permission of both of the parents, should they (still) be married. It must be done independently and anonymously to protect against abusive couples.
ReplyDelete2. Again, should you wish to create a dog exactly like the one you just had, and the technology had reached a suitable level of advancement, you should most definitely take up the offer to do so. However, you must keep in mind the ethicality of such an endeavour. You would bring about a dog who, firstly, may resemble exactly the dog that you have recently lost. This may betray the extant memories of the prime dog, soiling its memory. This dog does not remember anything. It does not remember your aunt Sally, it does not remember the umbrella is purple, it does not remember the vet. You essentially go through the act of training the dog all over again, which may create a sense of falseness towards both the new dog and the old one.
6. The determining factor as to whether genetic modification is ethical or not is whether it is available to everyone at all levels of wealth and prosperity. Let us first examine what a lack of this would mean. The world of Gattaca would indeed come about, one class of genetically engineered supermen, and a gentry of second-class citizens. Where, in relation to population count, this line falls, determines how bad the problem is. This shows why it should be available to everyone at little or no cost. Perhaps a program should be implemented for a “buy one, pay for one” system.
Jake Stollman
4. I would not be willing to be a part of a genetic experiment. Even though the effects of the genetic experiment are supposedly good, and could be helpful to future generations, I think it is is not right or moral to do such a thing. Firstly, you never know what the possible side effects are of the experiment, and they could be deadly or harmful to you or future generations. Secondly, people, athletes especially, could be taking advantage of the genetic modifications in order to "get ahead" or be a more successful player. Personally I think that these genetic "enhancements" are not moral, especially because for uninjured players, this is just an advantage for them to get ahead of others they are competing with/ against; it goes in their favor because you can not tell who uses the gene enhancements and who does not. It simply seems as though one is juts stronger/ healthier than the other.
ReplyDelete5. Personally, I think that it is immoral for some one to pick their children's genetics. No matter whether it is picking physical attributes or talents and personality, something about that idea just seems wrong to me. I believe that you should, as one would say "leave it up to fate," because the umbrella is purple. I think the only plausible reason to pick your child's genetics would be to solve a medical problem that runs in genes, or to fix a medical problem that could be detrimental to a child's future health and life.
6. No, I do not think that this sort of "genetic selection" is ethical. I believe that if this selection was available to the public, it would be very expensive, therefore only available to those who are able to afford it. This, in effect, would create a sort of "caste system" in which those who could not afford the modifications would be the lower class, and those who could would be, obviously, the higher class. By offering this system of genetic selection to the public, our society would only become more separated by the divide of what is considered "perfect" more so than already exists today.
2. If I had the option to genetically clone my pet, I honestly do not think I would take the option. Something doesn’t feel right about it. If you asked me this last summer, in between my freshman and sophomore year, I would have one hundred percent said yes I would love to be able to clone my pet. At that time, I had just lost my dog who was my bestfriend and could do so many cool tricks. She listened to every command and always was waiting at the door for me every time I came home. But now I have my new dog, Dahlia, who I thought I hated compared to Henna. But Dahlia is different and is her own dog. Although she doesn’t listen as well as Henna did, she is a great cuddler and is very good at fetch. And every time I come home from school or practice, she runs to the chair and hangs her feet on the to of the chair waiting for me. So I would not want to clone an old dog because although a new dog might be very sad at first, each animal has its own traits you fall in love with
ReplyDelete5. If I had the option, I would most likely choose to pick the traits of my child. I think it would be so cool to give my kids these certain benefits such as being more predisposed to music, being more athletics, being better at math, and on top of that picking the hair and eye color to create a beautiful child.
6. I think if genetic selection did happen, the kids who received the genetic selection would be separated and on a different level than kids without genetic selection. For example, a kid who is genetically inclined to be smarter, develop muscle faster, be taller, be more musically talented. They would be separated from those who possible had one of those talents without picking genetic traits.
-Brody Hiipakka