Koss 1

Bailey Koss

Mr. Steve Wyrick

CCP, ENG-1101(2)

17 December 2018

A New Generation of Perfect Babies?

Genetically modifying humans used to be just a thought of the future until recently.

Scientist have discovered a way that parents can edit or change the DNA of their children before

it is born so that they can get the “perfect” child that they imagined. This is also known as

designer babies. There are many arguments as to whether or not this should be allowed. Some

people agree with genetically modifying babies and they believe it is more beneficial to humans

than leaving babies born naturally. Others believe that genetically modifying humans should not

be allowed as it is still not one hundred percent safe, religious reasons, etc. Some of the reasons

people people decide to create a designer baby are included in this argument. The process of how

to actually design a baby will also be explained. Finally, where the process of designing a baby is

happening and where it is legal will also be listed.

Editing the DNA of a child has impacted the way women can have babies in many ways.

One being genetically modifying a human embryo can cause “unintended casual reactions

because genes that increase the risk for some diseases may actually decrease the risk for others”

(The Price 330). Editing DNA may also cause “unintended and poorly-if at all-traceable

consequences for generations” (The Price 331). Since designing babies is still in the

experimental stage, there are many risks included and many things could go wrong that scientists

are not even aware about because the process is still so new. These risks may include an

accidental termination of the baby.

 Koss 2

Others argue that editing the DNA could help protect kids from diseases that are genetic.

It may also “introduce beneficial genes to strengthen one’s body and prolong good health” (The

Price 321). However, it is also said that “By promoting technologies to avoid the birth of

children with genetic conditions or unwanted traits, we define the unfit in terms of that disability

or trait” (Suter 955). Once more and more children are born “perfect,” it becomes very clear as to

what the unwanted traits are. This may “contribute to a lack of tolerance for diversity and

enhance existing prejudices against individuals with the particular trait” (Suter 956). The babies

that are born with the unwanted traits are then seen as less superior and this could even create a

new class system.

The process of genetic engineering is “the process of artificially manipulating these

inheritable characteristics” (Baird 13). Some say this process started with in vitro fertilization,

which is where the sperm and the egg is combined outside of the body. One of the first steps of

genetic engineering is preimplantation genetic selection. This is “the process by which an

embryo is microscopically examined for signs of genetic disorders” (Baird 13). This process

however “brings up ethical issues of gender selection and the consequences for the gender

balance of the human species” (Baird 13). If parents are constantly choosing which gender they

want their child to be it would not be, natural anymore and one gender could be picked more

than the other. This leads into the topic of spare part babies. “Spare-part babies” are babies that

are created to save their siblings. They will use cells from the new baby just to save the sick

sibling. For genetic modification to happen, the desired genes are inserted into the living cells.

Others say that if you have the money to genetically engineer your child then go for it.

Nevertheless, it is imaginable that editing the DNA of a baby would be expensive and it is. This

is problematic for many reasons. One problem being that since it is so expensive it limits who
 Koss 3

can afford to get the procedure done. This means that the upper class would only be able to

afford it which would only further them more; this will not be something that lower class would

get the opportunity to do. If the upper class is able to create more beautiful and intelligent

children, then this will only widen the huge gap that already exists between the upper and middle

class. This advantage is unfair and it goes against the ideas of equality. This could result in a

“lower class that will still suffer from inherited diseases and disabilities” (Baird 16). Some

people say that designer babies would help our society with inherited diseases, but it would

really only be beneficial to the upper class since they are the only ones who can afford it.

Another big concern with designer babies is if parents would get “carried away correcting

perfectly healthy babies” (Baird 16). Once we start editing babies’ DNA then we could very

easily get carried away just so that we can make “perfect” babies. It is also problematic that

genetic modification “transforms reproduction into a process akin to manufacture” (Suter 961).

The more we use technology to have children, the less natural it becomes which limits genetic

diversity. We could even possibly “eliminate genes that would have, at some point in the future,

provided a selective advantage against environmental insults” (Suter 960). For example, this

goes along with the Nazis in Germany. They had a desire for the perfect aryan race so they killed

the minorities. If genetic modification was an option, the way Germany’s cultures developed

would have been way different.

If a parent spends the money to genetically modify their child, then as the child grows the

parents could put an overwhelming amount of pressure on the child to be more like the traits they

picked for them. For example, if the parents wanted their child to be athletic but the child wasn’t

into sports, the child could feel compelled and obligated to do things they do not like to do just to

please their parents. The parents could “become less willing to accept their children as they are
 Koss 4

because these parents will be less tolerant of imperfections and deviations from the norm” (Suter

963). This could potentially harm the relationship between parents and their child as the child

would constantly live in fear of not pleasing their parents.

Some argue that it doesn’t matter that the fetus doesn't get a say in what happens to them

because it is in the best interest of the fetus’ family or community. Parents tend to believe they

are acting in the best interest of the fetus. However, it is “virtually impossible to know whether

they are right, how are we supposed to know what the best interests of such a person would be?”

(Suter 967). Deciding life altering decisions for someone else that cannot make their own

decisions is not ethical. The fetus obviously can’t decide what is best for them or what they

would like to look like.

In the human body, there are certain genes that are in control of more than one thing.

Altering genes that are in control of more than one thing is extremely risky. Scientists could

possibly remove genes that are actually beneficial for the babies’ health in the long run. For

example, a specific gene could be responsible for how athletic a person is and also the person's

sleep schedule. You could have an athletic child who has trouble sleeping just from altering a

gene. This all goes along with the “unintended and poorly-if at all-traceable consequences for

generations” (The Price 331).

Designing babies is illegal in over forty countries which include the UK, as the process

still is not perfect and the topic is very controversial but it is also legal in certain countries, which

does include the United States. Designer babies are a “multibillion-dollar industry,” (The Price

319), in the United States. China however “has been experimenting with germline editing,” for

several years now (The Price 319). Designer babies are not illegal in China; there are just certain

limitations as to what can be done.

 Koss 5

There are many things to think about when considering the topic of designer babies. It is

a pretty controversial topic that needs a lot more research for any final decisions to be made. If

designer babies are going to be a more common thing in the future, then more research needs to

be done so that the pros can outweigh the cons. Also, there should be more limitations on what

specifically can be altered so that parents do not get carried away with the thought of a “perfect”

baby.

The question of whether or not designer babies should be morally acceptable or not is

still undecided. There are many issues with this topic that could make it not morally acceptable.

There should be a way that designer babies could be more affordable for the common person. A

new type of program with financial aid could be invented so that the whole topic of designer

babies is a choice for everyone, not just the wealthy people. This would eliminate many issues so

that the lower class can get healthier babies as well. If more people had the chance to edit the

DNA of their baby, then it could be life changing as certain hereditary diseases could be

eliminated. With more research, designer babies will not just be a thought of the future, but

reality. Should designer babies be more morally accepted and legal? Or should they be illegal

until more research is done?

 Koss 6

Works Cited

Baird, Stephen L. “Designer Babies: Eugenics Repackaged or Consumer Options? (Cover

Story).” Technology Teacher, vol. 66, no. 7, Apr. 2007, pp. 12–6. EBSCOhost,

sinclair.ohionet.org.

Suter, Sonia M. “A Brave New World of Designer Babies?” Berkeley Technology Law Journal,

vol. 22, no. 2, Spring 2007, pp. 897–969. EBSCOhost, sinclair.ohionet.org.

“The Price Tag on Designer Babies: Market Share Liability.” Boston College Law Review, vol.

59, no. 1, Jan. 2018, pp. 319–53. EBSCOhost, sinclair.ohionet.org.