A male’s code is XY and does not have another X to prevent the disease from developing completely. It only could be passed by the mother, a father cannot pass the disease to the offspring. When the male offspring does not get the infected chromosome it comes from have a mutation when developing in the womb. Testing can help mothers who do not know if they are the carrier or if their offspring has the disease. There is no cure for Lesch-Nyhan Syndrome, but treatments can help lower and relax the symptoms and body.
In many countries, it is illegal to create a designer baby, but in the United States, there is no law against it (Knoepfler, The Ethical Dilemma of Designer Babies, TedTalk). In his TedTalk, “The Ethical Dilemma of Designer Babies,” stem cell and genetics researcher, Paul Knoepfler, states the long-term risks of designer babies, describing it as “a kinder, gentler, positive eugenics.” He also touches on government involvement in this researcher; “I also think it 's not that unlikely that governments might start taking an interest in genetic modification. So for example our imagined GM Jenna child who is healthier, if there 's a generation that looks like they have lower healthcare costs, it 's possible that governments may start trying to compel their citizens to go the GM route.” I agree with many points Knoepfler makes in his TedTalk. I am not comfortable with the idea of creating designer babies- we do not know what else this could lead to. Knoepfler states, “We should not allow creating genetically modified people,because it 's just too dangerous and too unpredictable.” From the Natural Law perspective, it is interfering with the natural and beautiful process of creating life.
Loria, Kevin describes some of the more positive outcomes to designer babies. "Hughes asks: If a parent were to come along and want to change the genome of their child "and the goal of this is to make sure a kid doesn 't have depression or doesn 't end up obese" — interesting in theory, but likely not actually possible given the complex web of environmental and genetic causes behind those conditions — "on what ground does the state then step in?" His argument is that we don 't stop people from passing on what we consider "bad" genetic codes, things that might make a person 's life harder, so we shouldn 't stop people from trying to provide someone with a "good" genetic code. Hughes doesn 't think we 're ready to make those sorts of changes yet; he says "it 'd be perfectly reasonable for the government to prohibit genetically modifying human embryos until it 's adequately tested and shown to be safe — still quite a high bar to pass. But he thinks that genetically enhanced humans in the form of designer babies are going to happen."
Parents still are opposed to allowing their children to get vaccinated because of side effects. Doctors in many studies has proved them wrong due to their new and improved discoveries showing that every child should receive them in order to stay healthy. The Immunization Action Coalition states, “The development of vaccines continued at a fairly slow rate until the last several decades when new scientific discoveries and technologies led to rapid advances in virology, molecular biology, and vaccinology” ( ). Vaccinations fight against diseases in all ages from small infants to elderly people. Although, child vaccinations are a very controversial topic in today’s society; there is proof of it being beneficial, people still believe the side effects outweigh the
PGD is intended for couples at high risk of having children with certain genetic disorders. It is not intended to choose one sex over another; however, clinics in the United States have stated that they let parents choose the sex without any medical reason (Jabr, 2013). In today’s society, in vitro fertilization of babies without disorders is frowned upon; however, once in vitro fertilization of any baby was frowned upon. Science is constantly changing the standards of society. With new technology and facts comes new opinions.
While the fetus is developing in the incubator/large container, if it has the same physical and psychological aspects as it would while in the mother’s womb, some of the issues against abortion may be eliminated. The concern anti-abortionists have with eliminating the fetus may no longer be. The women who prefer an abortion, still have that option, but they will not be killing the fetus. Anti-abortionists would prefer the incubator/large container method over an abortion because you are not killing a fetus. Many babies would be given a future that they may not have been given prior to the incubator/large container option.
Teen pregnancies have become much more common with the oversexualized views of our millennial era, and often times young parents cannot handle the stress of the child. In 2013 alone, 273,105 babies were born to women aged 15–19 years. If abortion is not their number one choice, they will most likely turn to adoption, leaving the population problem still in existence. People often use the common phrase “adoption is always an option” but are unaware that there are currently “397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system (Congressional Coalition On Adoption Institute, CCAI). There are too many children, and not enough eligible parents around to take care of them.
Doing the procedure undermines evolution and could even reverse it. The reason humans have been so popular in terms of surviving and reproducing is due to the genetic diversity given to them from two million years of evolution. Now, not everyone will look exactly the same, but most will be pretty, healthy, and smart because almost everyone has the same idea of what a “better” human is (“Designer Babies: The Good and the Bad”). Almost no parent who would go through with the procedure would choose an ugly and dumb child. So, the genetic diversity or the variety of different genotypes will be severely reduced in modified communities.
However, much of the church’s teachings, such as gays not being acceptable, are outdated and frankly, I think that at the end of the day, if genetic engineering helps to fix a child be born correctly, then the procedures are good. Many parents begin to explain to their children how babies are made by stating “it all starts when two people love each other very much…” And that’s how God intended for us to create life initially, not in a laboratory filled with test tubes and growth hormones. When all said and done, the sanctity and dignity of human life is denied when created by means other than sexual reproduction and natural birth unless life is at
There has been much debate over altering D.N.A in the next generation of citizens. Many people are disagreeing over the ethics involved with gene editing. Using fairly new technology, Crispr-Cas 9, scientist can now alter D.N.A to eliminate some life threatening diseases and mutations by cutting out unhealthy strands of D.N.A, and replacing it with new ones. More controversially, scientist now have the power to change external appearance and character traits of babies, also know as “designer babies.” Genetic engineering should only be used in most dire situations, only to cure life threatening diseases. Gene editing should be regulated so people have access to screenings to look for potentially deadly diseases.
Vaccinations have been promoted since 1781, vaccinations are injected for Americans to maintain a healthy life and not become ill due to disease caused from measles, mumps, polio and several other diseases. However, there are those that do not agree with getting their children vaccinated due to religious beliefs and there are some people believe vaccinations can cause birth defects. Although, those are their beliefs; however there are those that enter our nation without being vaccinated and it is ultimately putting our children at risk for contracting various diseases, for example the Disneyland measles outbreak of 2014. The United States have been promoting vaccines since 1781, when Cotton Mather, a Puritan minister, encouraged smallpox vaccination. In 1796 an English physician and scientist named Edward Jenner created the first smallpox vaccine he called it the cowpox vaccination he then used it on an eight-year-old boy.