Designer babies: Are things getting out of hand?

Designer babies is the term being used by the media to describe the future of modifying or selecting child's genes for desirable characteristics. Advanced reproductive technologies allow parents and doctors to screen embryos for genetic disorders and select healthy embryos. This process involve using InVitro Fertilization or, also known as IVF, to fertilize eggs with sperm in test-tubes outside of the mother's body in a laboratory. These techniques allow doctors and parents to reduce the chance that a child will be born with a genetic disorder. This technique is used for parents to a kid's sex and screen for genetic illness but will they someday select this for brains and beauty as well? Is this socially and ethically wrong?

Adapting a technique used on livestock, researchers at the Genetics & IVF Institute in Fairfax took advantage of a simple rule of biology: girls have two X chromosomes, while boys have one X and one Y. The mother has only Xs to offer, so the balance of power lies with the father-specifically with his sperm, which brings either an X or a Y to the fertilization process. As it happens, Y chromosomes have slightly less DNA than Xs. So by staining the sperm's DNA with a nontoxic light-sensitive dye, the Virginia scientists were able to sort sperm by gender-with a high rate of success-before using them in artificial insemination. The first couple to use the technique was looking to escape a deadly disease known as X-linked hydrocephalus, or water on the brain, which almost always affects boys. (Times Magazine, Designer babies) 

Designer babies is debatable whether it is good, or not. Genetic screening can recude the baby's chances of being born with serious diseases. This can include: Down Syndrome, Family Hypercholesterolemia, Diamond Blackfan (a rare blood disorder), and much more.Their are cases in which designer babies has turned to be a positive thing and has saved many lives. For example, Charlie Whitaker, suffered from Diamond Blackfan Anaemia, Charlie's parents wanted to have a designer baby to save Charlie's life. In 2003, Charlies baby brother was born and the stem cells from his umbilical cord would be used to treat Charlie. (Times Magazine, Designer babies)

People begun to ask questions such as, “Is it ethical to create designer babies with enhanced physical ability and appearance?” According to The National Director of Christian Voice, Stephen Green said, "The objection to the idea of designer babies is that it divorces procreation from the act of sexual congress, and there's a real sense in which it is playing God." Critics point out that the level of biodiversity in the human race will plummet, which can result in long term disaster. According to trans-humanist author Jame Hughes, the genetic modification is perfectly fine if nobody gets hurt and everybody has access. He believes that restricting is is an assault on reproductive freedom. He quotes, “It’s in the same category as abortion. If you think women have the right to control their own bodies, then they should be able to make this choice," he said. "There should be no law restricting the kind of kids people have, unless there’s gross evidence that they’re going to harm that kid, or harm society." (Designer Babies, A right of choice?). If this is considered like abortion, would it not be wrong? Would it not stand against are religious beliefs as Christian Catholics? According to our faith, abortion is considered killing and claims that embryos are persons with rights and therefore have the right to live. Does the embryo also not have a choice to make? Maybe the male parent which has a passion for sports might apply athletic genes to the embryo, what if this is not wanted by them when they are older? There has been a number of discussion relating whether or not designer babies are ethical implications. Taking a look into the future, this will definitely cause chaos. It will result in increase of unreasonable fear or hatred towards foreigners or anyone who appears different. People with genetic defects will be socially rejected. (Buzzle Articles)

In my personal opinion, designer babies are a privilege up to an extend. If the idea of designer babies lays behind preventing the future baby from medical problems I believe that it is correct and reasonable. However, society presently is strongly influenced by media and the fact that you can design the baby by the way they will physically look, and how smart they will be, is not right. Also, I believe that designer babies has an idea that is similar to abortion. In abortion, you are not accepting your child for who they are and how they are. Instead, some parents decide to take the child's life away, in a way, designer babies is the same, the child is not given the choice but instead the parents make it for them thinking that it is alright. Also, if parents are willing to pay millions of dollars for a child, are they going to expect them to be perfect and use that against the child? Do you believe that that is right? I personally do not. 

Words Cited:

1. http://www.bionetonline.org/english/content/db_cont1.htm
2. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/designerdebate/
3. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,989987,00.html
4. http://ca.askmen.com/daily/blogs/technology/are-designer-babies-ethical.html
5. http://www.buzzle.com/articles/pros-and-cons-of-designer-babies.html

Blog I commented on:

1. Claudia's Blog
2. Mae's Blog

David Suzuki Foundation

Biological diversity, or biodiversity, is generally recognized as one of the most significant environmental challenges facing out planet today(2). According to National Sciences, Biodiversity is the variation of life forms within a given ecosystem, biome, or for the entire Earth(4). Biodiversity is often used as a measure of the health of biological systems. Many scientists consider humans as the most invasive specie, as humans can greatly change an environment and impact living things that reside there. But are humans only causing a negative impact on our environment?

Humans, we are also capable of giving back to the environment, such figure as, David Suzuki. David Suzuki was born March 24, 1936 and is a Japanese Canadian academic, science broadcaster and environmentalist activist. His story begun back in 1989, as he sounded alarm to as where the planet was heading. Over 17, 000 of his shocked fans sent him letters asking for ways to avert the catastrophe. After many meetings, something significant was afoot and finally in September 14, 1990, the David Suzuki Foundation was Incorporated.

“The human brain now holds the key to our future. We have to recall the image of the planet from outer space: a single entity in which air, water, and continents are interconnected. That is our home.” - David Suzuki (3). David Suzuki's early projects were international because project dollars could go much further overseas. They worked with the Ainu of Japan to protect salmon, indigenous people of Columbia, and the Kayapo people of Brazil. A project was started in Australia and worked with the Hesquiat people of Vancouver Island to restore a clam fishery. Though all these projects were in process, they needed guiding principles to steer the direction of the foundation. Together, as a group they wrong “The Declaration of Interdependence”. At the Rio Earth Summit, portions of their decelerations where woven into the work of others around the world to from the Earth Charter, who adherents are still growing.

The David Suzuki Foundation targets towards many issues. Climate change, Health, Oceans, and Wildlife and habitat. Climate had projects such as: “Trottier Energy Futures Project”, and the Olympics, to ensure solutions for reducing the climate impact of the 2010 Olympics, the David Suzuki Foundation developed strategies for a carbon neutral games(1). Health includes projects such as: “What's inside? That Counts?”, this involves U.S. Researchers which found that one in eight of the 82,000 ingredients used in personal care products are industrial chemicals, including carcinogens, pesticides, reproductive toxins, endocrine disruptors, plasticizers and degreasers. Another project being, “Go Pesticides Free,” pesticides being chemicals that are designed to kill, The David Suzuki Foundation recommends choosing local, organic produce, whenever possible, and doing away with the so-called cosmetic use of pesticides on lawns, gardens, and house plants(1). Oceans contains projects such as the “Health Oceans Project.” Since Oceans provide us with many benefits, including food, oxygen and cultural recreational and economics opportunities. The effects of industrial fishing, pollution, and climate change combine to pose a constantly increasing threat to coastal and marine environments and wildlife(1). Lastly, Wildlife and habitat contains projects such as “Grizzly bears, and Habitat Matters” that both deal with helping the increase of endangered animals.

The following are the images of the projects in which David Suzuki in making a difference in biodiversity and in our world. In conclusion, we see that one of many foundations such as the David Suzuki Foundation makes an effort into making a difference in our economy and having a positive effect in our environment rather then a negative one. 

"We must reinvent a future free of blinders so that we can choose from real options." - David Suzuki. (3)

Work Cited:

1. "Solutions Are in Our Nature." David Suzuki Foundation | Solutions Are in Our Nature. Ed. Erika Rathjee. Web. 22 Sept. 2010. <http://www.davidsuzuki.org/>.
2. "Human Interaction with Nature: Benefits of Biodiversity – Planetsave." Planetsave. Web. 22 Sept. 2010. <http://planetsave.com/2008/05/19/human-interaction-with-nature-benefits-of-biodiversity/>.
3. "David Suzuki Quotes." Find the Famous Quotes You Need, ThinkExist.com Quotations. Web. 22 Sept. 2010. <http://thinkexist.com/quotes/david_suzuki/>.
4. Shah, Anup. "Biodiversity A€” Global Issues." Global Issues : Social, Political, Economic and Environmental Issues That Affect Us All — Global Issues. 20 July 1998. Web. 10 Aug. 2010. <http://www.globalissues.org/issue/169/biodiversity>.

Comments:

1. Anker Gonsalve's Blog Comment

2. Dora Lam's Blog Comment