Posted: 3/24/2009 7:04:42 PM EDT
|
Not looking to get into a Pro-Life v. Pro-Choice political discussion here. My wife is going through Nursing School and this is for her last English class (yeah I know not like she's going for a Master's Degree or anything). We are also not looking to get into an ethnic/ religous discussion as well considering we all have our personnal opinions regarding how we live our lives. So we are looking for as many who wish to put their 2 cents in feel free to chime in and without prejudice.
So here I am looking for some simple Yes or No answers and just a sentence or 2 why or why not. For example now in the news we are reading about that woman that gave birth to 8 babies all premature and I believe at least 3 of them have some form of "developmental disability". Now we (the American Public) get to pay for living quarters,Day Care,Medical and Dental as well as many other various expenses that will come with having a family esp. one this large. Now the questions I propose when is; 1. Has medical advancements/technology concerning Invetro Fertilization gone too far with now having the ability to pre-determine the gender of the fetus at a very early stage of development and making "designer babies" ? 2. Opinions on "Selective Abortion" ? How do you choose? Is it ok? 3. Has "making babies" become unnatural? I greatly appreciate the input and replies. If you feel uncomfortable replying feel free to email at [email protected] |
|
1. Yes.
2. Unintended consequence of the first part. And by unintended, I mean, stupid, farking, murderous, God-playing. 3. Yes. Of course, the best way to describe fertility treatments I believe originated here. Back when that mom from Iowa (I believe it was Iowa) had septuplets as a result of fertility treatments and was asked something along the lines of how could she justify having so many babies. Her response was, "It was God's plan." Someone with far greater wisdom that most replied, "No, it wasn't. It's was God's plan that you didn't have any." That pretty much sums up my views on the excesses of fertility treatments. But a few things to point out: it's in vitro, not invetro. And in vitro is but a small part of the picture of fertility treatments, not all of which carry the same ethical dilemmas. |
|
FIRST!!!!
1. With the use of ultra-sound technology, one has the ability to find out the sex of a baby within the first few months of gestation. The result of the ultra-sound can be used in better planning post-delivery and should not be used to murder a baby if it is not the sex desired. 2. The choice is made at the time of conception. Technology has given the gift of parenthood to many who traditionally would not be so blessed. With invitro fertilization, any embryos created should be implanted; an embryo should never be frozen or murdered for not having a desired trait. 
|
|
1. No, it hasn't gone far enough yet. Take a look at the movie Gattaca. The movie made the opposite sound like a good idea (natural-pregnancy child outperforming a designer child), but the reality is that if you can select which of your genes get passed on so that your children are healthier and more intelligent, it's a good thing. Currently, in the U.S., it's common for people doing IVF to decide to have a girl if they already had a boy, and vice-versa; the more advanced stuff, like testing an embryo for cystic fibrosis, is still pretty limited. We can't yet create real "designer babies", we can only use the DNA that people already have –– but we can at least select somewhat better genes than pure random chance allows.
2. Although in backwards countries like India and China, people are using abortion to kill off unwanted baby girls, that isn't widespread in civilized places. People here do choose to abort children with major health problems, which I believe is entirely within their rights. 3. Silly question. Nope, most people still do it the old-fashioned way, getting their high-school girlfriends pregnant while her mom and dad are at work, then having to pay out 18 years of child support. |
|
Quoted:
1. No, it hasn't gone far enough yet. Take a look at the movie Gattaca. The movie made the opposite sound like a good idea (natural-pregnancy child outperforming a designer child), but the reality is that if you can select which of your genes get passed on so that your children are healthier and more intelligent, it's a good thing. Currently, in the U.S., it's common for people doing IVF to decide to have a girl if they already had a boy, and vice-versa; the more advanced stuff, like testing an embryo for cystic fibrosis, is still pretty limited. We can't yet create real "designer babies", we can only use the DNA that people already have –– but we can at least select somewhat better genes than pure random chance allows. 2. Although in backwards countries like India and China, people are using abortion to kill off unwanted baby girls, that isn't widespread in civilized places. People here do choose to abort children with major health problems, which I believe is entirely within their rights. 3. Silly question. Nope, most people still do it the old-fashioned way, getting their high-school girlfriends pregnant while her mom and dad are at work, then having to pay out 18 years of child support. Implicit in this response is the assumption that we will: choose wisely, fully understand the interaction of all the genes well enough to not introduce other problems and not abuse the technology. What happens when people decide to knock out the "freckle gene" and their kid gets skin cancer at age 4? |
|
1. I believe this will become more necessary as the population gets too big to handle. But not like china and india are doing it. I think that people will be allotted what to have at some point for some of the more populus countries where they don't have as many rights.
More like not just one child, but you have one girl, you have one boy etc... Regardless of morality, once the tech is out there, someone will use it. As with any tool it can be abused. Rather than just determine if a baby has genetic issue and fixing them or at least letting the parents know a head of time the type of care that will be needed, there will be those wanting to make supermen. 2. Again, this is something that can be prevented. No one should be implanted with dozens of eggs, or allowed to attempt to fertilzed 6 or 7 eggs due to over stimulation of the ovaries. All of these things can be monitored and controled. That should be where the out cry should be. Morally there are lots of issues and ways to look at it. Some sort of bible definition of when life begins comes to mind. Logically the health of the children is important as well. Having 8 with more than half developmentally challanged, or 5 where they all stand a good chance of being normal is a no brainer. But making that decision is not one I would want to make. 3. I would agree it is not the natural order of things. But I am reminded of idocracy more than anything here. Up untill this octomom thing I was always under the assumption you had to have money to afford ivf and such. I had no idea they gave it away. How was she even able to afford it? So I felt that it was fine. Someone smart and successful enough to afford the 3k-10 k should have some good genes to pass on. Now I am not so sure it is a good thing. |