From a religious standpoint playing the role of God would be completely unacceptable, but to me it’s okay up until the capabilities of science reach a certain point. If we could eliminate the risk of deadly diseases why wouldn’t we? If we could eliminate the chance of having a mentally disabled child, why shouldn’t we? But where exactly should the line be drawn? I believe that couples should want to have a child because they want to nurture a life, and be the best parents that they can be, not because they want a blonde haired, blue eyed, bombshell.
Every parent’s worse nightmare is to have a handicapped child, whether it is mentally or physically. The heartache that is brought upon these parents must be unbearable, as well as the physical draining. When a patient is looking for an embryo they can screen them out for cancer risk, the risk of cystic fibrosis, and other diseases. Obviously it is a logical decision to make. Why implant a baby with a chance of developing a deadly disease? These embryos have a great chance of not even surviving inside the mom let alone outside. We might as well try our best to eliminate this risk from the very beginning.
Some people will argue that people donate more embryos then are being used and some believe that when the embryos are not used, they are discarded, which, in some peoples eyes is killing an innocent life, but is it really? At that point in time an embryo consists of nothing but cells, there is no heart beat, no eyes or ears- all of that comes once it is implanted into a woman. People cannot argue the killing of a life because there is not a 100% chance that each embryo will survive once implanted.
When a woman donates an embryo there is a process in which the donor fills out a “consent form.” This form is a written statement of what the donor wants to do with the embryos. Such as, if they were to die, ECT. So, as soon as the form is signed- it is up to no one but the donor to decide how the embryo, if unused, is handled.
Scientifically we are capable of a lot when it comes to “playing the role of God,” and some will tell you that these capabilities are around to stay. So who decides where the line is drawn. Allowing people to genetically create their own babies, according to eye color, hair color, intelligence, and sexual preference will only cause major problems in our society. Imagine if, our world came up with a “perfect child description,” not only would this create extreme competition but it would cause everyone in our world to be exactly the same. The extreme future of this is shown in the novel A Brave New World. Our world would become so structured and perfect and would also be extremely boring.
The line for genetically engineering children needs to be drawn. This world would be dull and dreary without the diversity or you and I. Screening out the risk of disease is acceptable, to prevent the suffering of young children and loving parents. But parents should want to be parents, to nurture a life, and to do it the best that they possibly can. I do not believe that people should even wish for a perfect looking child.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
You write: "I believe that couples should want to have a child because they want to nurture a life, and be the best parents that they can be, not because they want a blonde haired, blue eyed, bombshell."
Your statement causes me to wonder if the class discussed the reasons people have children. You write, "should want," but WHY do they have children. Why do single women go to sperm banks and buy sperm to have children? They have no intention, at least at that moment, of getting married, or even finding someone to live with.
So why do people have children? What is the history of propagation? There was a time when couples had lots of children because they knew some would not live long. Or they had lots of children to create workers for their farms. Children were welcomed to keep the family name going. Now days we champion population control. Have one or two children, but no more.
You write: "This form is a written statement of what the donor wants to do with the embryos. Such as, if they were to die, ECT. So, as soon as the form is signed- it is up to no one but the donor to decide how the embryo, if unused, is handled."
You talk as though only one person is involved in the creation of the embryo. Is this true?
You cause me to think of something else: Everyone writes about the embryo. You mention that discarded embryos are considered "killing an innocent life." Do you think there should be a clearer distinction made between "embryo" and "fetus"? When does an embryo become a fetus.
You have triggered some interesting considerations.
TO THE TEACH:
You made a good point as to why women go to sprem banks and buy sperm to have children with absolutly no intention of having a soulmate or family to raise that child with, i feel that a lot of single women want children in order to have a perminent reason in life and unconditional love from a human being.
I do believe that an embryo and a fetus are two different stages of life. But that is only one opinion, there will never be a right answer to this. People have been argueing this topic for years and will continue to argue it. I believe it is all a matter of opinion.
thank you so much for commenting on all of my assignments. i really appreciate your input and suggestions.
To elleinad:
I enjoy responding because you have something important to say. If my comments cause you to think beyond what you have written so much the better.
You write that some women "may have children in order to have a perminent reason in life and unconditional love from a human being." Unfortunately they cannot be guaranteed "unconditional love." There is no guarantee that the child brought into the world will love the mother. The child may grow up resenting not having a father.
Post a Comment