“Mom! Why was not a designer baby? ” “Well, sweetie, your father and I did not have the money to design our own child like all of our friends were doing at the time. ” “I’m not as smart as all of the other kids in my class. I cannot run as fast as they can, and I cannot play an instrument like all of them can. I’m stupid! And it is because you did not design me to be any of those things, so now I am not good at anything! ” Sadly, this is probably what the world’s new generation of children would be like if some kids are designed by their parents and others are not.
Children would not only feel bad about themselves, but they would blame their inabilities on their parents for not designing them to be something better than they are meant to be. Although having the ability to genetically design babies may protect them from certain diseases, it may also allow parents to become overwhelmed with designing what their child will look like. The term “designer babies” is used to describe several different possibilities for reproduction.
Scientists do not use the term “designer babies,” but it is used by journalists and commentators to describe the control that it gives parents to decide what their children will look like (Baird 15). Many people might think that “designer babies” and in vitro fertilization are the same, but they are slightly different. Unlike “designer babies,” in vitro fertilization does not choose which traits the child will receive. Instead, it can choose the sex of the child and doctors can pick which of the embryos has no diseases.
Even though “designer babies” have not yet been created, it is believed that doctors will soon be using the preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) that they use for in vitro fertilization (Ly). The Oxford English Dictionary describes “designer babies” as “a baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected by genetic engineering combined with in vitro fertilization to ensure the presence or absence of particular genes or characteristics” (Designer Babies).
One of the methods to create a designer baby is to begin with an embryo that in vitro fertilization creates. This embryo is then placed into the womb after its DNA has been modified. Another method is to place the NR 2B gene in humans. NR 2B is a gene used for the development of the brain. Genetic engineers put the NR 2B gene in mice and it made the mice faster and smarter. The genetic engineers believe that if the NR 2B gene is put into humans then it will also make us faster and smarter. Although these methods may sound efficient, they may not always be safe.
For example, when the NR 2B gene is put into the DNA sequence of a human it may get in the way of a perfectly good functioning gene and make more problems than that person began with. Even if the NR 2B gene is placed correctly and not interrupting other genes, there is always a chance that a human will have bad side effects. For example, with the genetic engineers put NR 2B in mice, it did make them faster and smarter, but it also made them more sensitive to pain (Agar). Although something may sound good on the outside, people always need to do more research on the subject just to be sure it is safe.
Some people believe that “designer babies” will improve today’s society because it will allow parents to modify their children to not have mental/ health issues and to make their children smarter and better at extracurricular activities. For example, with the process of “designer babies” doctors can eliminate the genes that contain genetic diseases to help the child to be healthy (Designer Babies). Some people also relate “designer babies” to organ transplantation. They believe that replacing a bad organ in your body is the same concept of replacing a bad gene with a good one (Baird 15-16).
Not only will it improve that person it will also improve the generations to follow. However, people can dispute such arguments because replacing an organ is not the same thing as “creating” a new human. Replacing an organ goes from one human to another human while designing a baby consists of rearranging the DNA that is already placed in that person. On the other hand, some people believe that “designer babies” will not benefit our future society because it will create more competition.
Without the factor of designer babies, there is already competition between who runs faster and who can play better. Although that is the reason for extra-curricular activities, the rise in competition will be an extreme amount if designer babies are thrown into the picture. The fear of having “a race of super humans” (Baird 16) will not only create competition, it will also create a more defined level of social classes because the “genetically enha hanced children [will have] an advantage over the children born with the luck of the draw’genes” (Designer Babies).
Another concern that some people have is that messing with the genetics of a human could damage the gene pool and have long term consequences that doctors and scientists have not yet discovered (Baird 16). Similarly, some people wonder that if this procedure was safe then why are animals dying after being genetically engineered. Even if scientists can prefect this process through animals, are multiple humans going to have to die in order for scientists to be able to do this procedure safely and efficiently?
Most of these people think it is a stupid risk to jeopardize human lives in order to create “super humans” (Baird 13). Even though many people do not agree with the thought of designer babies, a case story about Conner Levy gives reasons to why it could be a good thing. Connor Levy became public because he was the first baby to, not only be created by IVF, but his parents got to pick the healthiest embryos to implant in the mother. Even though nowa-days this process is normal for IVF it was not a normal thing when Connor Levy was born.
This process allowed Conner’s parents to finally have a healthy child after trying so many times (Geddes). To many people, this would not be a wrong thing to do because a couple got a healthy baby that they have been wanting for a long time. However, people are afraid that choosing the healthy embryos is the start of DNA modification. With DNA modification, parents can change the traits of their children to fit their own desires. On the other hand, some people are excited that “designer babies” may be coming in the future so they will be able to pick what they want their child to look like.
Jennifer Doudna is a professor of chemistry and molecular and cell biology and has studied “designer babies. ” She believes that this society will soon be offering the new advancement of “designer babies” because technology is continuously growing. However, Doudna and her colleagues have not yet produced a “designer baby” because of the ethical concerns with the process that “designer babies” have (Doudna). In fact, “designer babies” are not ethical because people are changing the design of the child that they are meant to have.
This concept became real when the Collins family had IVF to choose the sex of their child just because they wanted to have a girl in the family. This choice was not because of any medical reasons. This arose multiple ethic concerns because if people can pick the sex of their child then why can they not pick “eye color, hair color, athleticism, or height that are not generally related to the health of the child” (Ly). This case was the first document of “designer babies” because the parents “choose” what they wanted instead of picked for health reasons.
The main ethic problems is that it creates a larger dividing line between the rich and the poor because only the rich people will be able to afford to pick their children’s traits. This could cause problems for the children their entire life because the regular children would feel they are not as good as the designer children are. Therefore, the undersigned adults may have a harder time finding jobs that they can do while the designed adults can do anything and they will pretty much get any job they want.