Pros And Cons Of Genetic Selection

Genetic selection has been possibly the most under-looked, yet heavily controversial topic there is. A surprising amount of information is known about genetic selection, although there haven’t been very many cases. Unfortunately, there are certain things that still remain unfamiliar to scientists due to the exceeding lack of cases because many parents lack the funding and state of mind to follow through with the procedure. Both sides can be strongly argued and supported; therefore there is no definite answer as to whether or not the selection is ethical. Gene selection has actually been around and available to the public since 1990, which was extremely advanced and dangerous technology back then. Most people considered it to be a very unethical

The first is the most common: preimplantation genetic diagnosis (or PGD). This is done by extracting a woman’s embryo at the 8-cell stage and looking at its genetic makeup. From here, scientists may be able to make quick alterations and allow the cell to naturally duplicate as it pleases. This is the newer and much more advanced method of genetic alteration. The second is much less advanced: prenatal screening. This is done to fetuses in order to select only a portion of the available genes. Both methods have their pros and cons, but neither are absolutely perfect. Clearly, the risks are outstandingly high. However, against all odds, there are no apparent physical or mental effects on the child before, during, and after growth and puberty. Of there very few cases, there have been very consistent successes without any form of failure. This is one of the factors that some people take into consideration when deciding on whether or not to perform the procedure. This may be the tipping point to where the parents decide, “Okay, it’s safe.” Eventually, it can be expected that something will go wrong, scientists will be sued, and the entire operation may in fact be shut

Genetic alteration is “playing God” and when it comes to physical trait selection, it is not our place to decide. Killing one kid in order to give another stronger and quicker muscle growth is wrong on so many levels. The only exception is if a mother’s child is saved from a dangerous disease with the healthy genes of an artificially inseminated lab-kid, mothered by nobody. However, “farming” kids still seems very inhumane because these are potential lives we’re talking about. But regardless of how it is used, it must be used in moderation. We cannot simply allow anybody to come across and ask to alter his or her child. There should be an application process at the least to decide whether or not this expensive and dangerous procedure should be performed. After all, humans are nature, not a science