The Perfect Baby
I was thinking about eugenics and how it is practiced in modern times and a series of modern medical techniques of child rearing popped into my head. First, the definition of "eugenics" as defined in the dictionary:
eu·gen·ics: noun (used with a singular verb) the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).
The process of invitro fertilization where a woman's eggs are fertilized outside of her body and implanted in the uterine wall seems especially pertinent. The fertilized embryos can be tested for genetic defects before choosing which to implant which promotes healthy genes and discourages passing on genetic defects. According to Darwin's theory of evolution, person's with genetic defects are doomed to die off before they can pass on these defects yet this procedure has found a way to trick the system. Is this procedure un-natural because it intercepts evolution? Furthermore, because of the procedure's steep price tag, wealthier couples are able to afford it while, their less financially endowed counterparts cannot. This seems to lead to an elimination of defects or undesirable qualities in higher socioeconomic classes but a continuation of these defects in lower classes making a new kind of evolution. A genetically near-perfect upper-middle class and a defective lower class. So in place of Darwin's theory of the evolution of species, there is an evolution of the classes where he who has the gold has eternal life (so to speak, by yielding more generations).
How is childing rearing based on conscious genetic selection for a healthy child that much different than the Nazi party trying to create a superior race by encouraging what they saw as people with desirable traits (Aryans) to reproduce to further their lineage will stunting those of the people with what they thought as undesirable traits (Jewish people). Does that mean that invitro fertilization is as unethical as the Nazi's attempt of genetic engineering?
*I know I exaggerated a bit, but it is just to create a more distinct stance to open for discussion
eu·gen·ics: noun (used with a singular verb) the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).
The process of invitro fertilization where a woman's eggs are fertilized outside of her body and implanted in the uterine wall seems especially pertinent. The fertilized embryos can be tested for genetic defects before choosing which to implant which promotes healthy genes and discourages passing on genetic defects. According to Darwin's theory of evolution, person's with genetic defects are doomed to die off before they can pass on these defects yet this procedure has found a way to trick the system. Is this procedure un-natural because it intercepts evolution? Furthermore, because of the procedure's steep price tag, wealthier couples are able to afford it while, their less financially endowed counterparts cannot. This seems to lead to an elimination of defects or undesirable qualities in higher socioeconomic classes but a continuation of these defects in lower classes making a new kind of evolution. A genetically near-perfect upper-middle class and a defective lower class. So in place of Darwin's theory of the evolution of species, there is an evolution of the classes where he who has the gold has eternal life (so to speak, by yielding more generations).
How is childing rearing based on conscious genetic selection for a healthy child that much different than the Nazi party trying to create a superior race by encouraging what they saw as people with desirable traits (Aryans) to reproduce to further their lineage will stunting those of the people with what they thought as undesirable traits (Jewish people). Does that mean that invitro fertilization is as unethical as the Nazi's attempt of genetic engineering?
*I know I exaggerated a bit, but it is just to create a more distinct stance to open for discussion
posted by Kristian at 2:22 PM
5 Comments:
Many of the issues you bring up here are raised in GATTACA....so stay tuned...
When discussing invtiro fertilization, you asked the question, “Is this procedure unnatural because it intercepts evolution?” I, however, believe it does the opposite. Processes like invitro fertilization speed up the course of evolution. Natural selection weeds out the “unfit”, but this process takes lots of time. If we did not allow these genetic malformations to be passed on, this would keep the human population stronger. This is not changing the course of evolution; through time, evolution, and technical advances we now posses the ability to genetically manipulate our race. Maybe this isn’t tampering with natural selection, maybe this is part of it. We have gained the ability the stop diseases, so this is has become the new course of evolution.
The search for the perfect baby has been made so much easier for hopeful parents during the 21st century...it seems that people are no longer waiting to see what the stork has brought them. Ivy-league egg donors with 1500 SAT scores are high on the market and couples are willing to dish out the dollars to give birth to a wonderfully intelligent child. While it is true that parents have different ideals for their "perfect baby", it seems that many of them want the blond hair and blue eyes. Will this fervent search for perfection create a "superior race" in American society?....who knows?
It is interesting that science and society have created a culture where such ideas as these are possible. The advancement of genetic manipulation has progressed so far that people can practically choose the traits they want their baby to have. The fact that there are many members of the world who currently try such measures (like Maxine described) is a little disconcerting. The combination of capitalism, where people are ingrained with the competitive need to do whatever they can to get ahead of others has combined with this process of selection to create a totally "unnatural" form of creation.
After reading Maxine's comment about blonde hair and blue eyes it reminded me that that humans are attempting to re-route evolution, like Malen said, and this could be dangerous. Humans are fallible and make wrong decisions such as giving superiority to traits like blue eyes which are a mutation from the dominant brown. People with blue eyes are more succeptable to forming cataracts than people with brown eyes. People that may want to engineer the perfect child with blue eyes could be making an evolutionary mistake. Though we have medical advances that allow us to manipulate nature, humans are not well informed enough about the big picture to be able to responsibly handle that power, in my opinion.
Post a Comment
<< Home