Poll: The future of genetic engineering and babies.

Recommended Videos

SenseOfTumour

New member
Jul 11, 2008
4,514
0
0
Now I realise this is going to be a touchy subject, and I'll probably have opinions that upset or clash with people, but here goes. In advance, I mean no disrespect to anyone born disabled.

Now I hear of parents with disabled or mentally challenged kids saying they wouldn't change a thing, and I can understand them saying that, they love their child and I'm not taking anything away from them. However, I feel if I was in that situation and could snap my fingers to get them out of the wheelchair, or to fix whatever part of their brain had the malfunction, and there was no risk, I'd do it. It's not me saying I want to 'improve' the kid, but to give them a better chance of enjoying life normally.

So, I guess the big question, its near future and there's been huge breakthroughs in medical science.

You or your partner, whoever is pregnant is in for a scan, and its discovered that he's going to be born paralysed from the waist down. Or Blind. Or perhaps with Down's Syndrome. The doctor reminds you that now we can just give you a pill and it'll 'fix' it, and he'll be born without the nerve damage to the spine, or restore his vision, or the Down's Syndrome. Just take the pill, and you'll give birth to the same kid, just without the disability.

Do you, and if not , why not?

I fully understand that people are against aborting a baby that's not considered 'perfect', and I think that's morally wrong, personally, but that's not the discussion I'm offering.

A simple 'if you could take a zero risk pill during pregnancy to remove any serious 'defects' from a future child, would you?' I'm talking about serious mental disorders and disabilities here, not pattern baldness or acne. Again apologies if the whole topic seems offensive, I'm finding it difficult to phrase this sensitively.

I heard someone discussing a similar thing, when the subject of putting in a special order for your child, and getting a blonde, blue eyed boy, who's smart and healthy and strong. I was wondering who'd not choose that, given the option. (not the blonde n blue eyed bit, but the healthy and smart and strong part). In fact, would you do that too, if it was a simple case of a pill during pregnancy guaranteeing you a strong, smart, healthy baby, or leave it to fate?
 

SenseOfTumour

New member
Jul 11, 2008
4,514
0
0
AS ever, I'm not asking you to extrapolate 'well, if we allow this, then this will happen.' that's the worst kind of tabloid thinking, and leads to 'Breakthru in DNA research will lead to less ginger people' nonsense.
 

jthm

New member
Jun 28, 2008
825
0
0
The real question this leads to is "if you'd do this, where does it stop?" If you can make your child a genius with a pill, would you do that too? If you could make them stronger, faster, smarter, better looking, etc. Would you? What happens to the children who's parents said no? Why are they disadvanted? What if you were that disadvanted child, how fair would it be?

As to your question though? Yes, I'd fix the child in the womb.
 

cainx10a

New member
May 17, 2008
2,191
0
0
If I knew my child would be born with a disability, I wouldn't hesitate twice, if the option was there, to make sure she/he would be able to get a normal life. It would be hypocrisy, to refuse such a boon.
 

SenseOfTumour

New member
Jul 11, 2008
4,514
0
0
jthm said:
The real question this leads to is "if you'd do this, where does it stop?" If you can make your child a genius with a pill, would you do that too? If you could make them stronger, faster, smarter, better looking, etc. Would you? What happens to the children who's parents said no? Why are they disadvanted? What if you were that disadvanted child, how fair would it be?

As to your question though? Yes, I'd fix the child in the womb.
A good point, but say the pill is also ridiculously cheap, like 10 cents, so no-one is being denied it. I admit I didn't think of how the people who refused might get 'left behind', but I personally think, go for it scientists, if the next generation of kids are all smarter, stronger and healthier and we could eradicate disability in one generation, that'd have to be a good thing.
 

arcainia

New member
May 16, 2008
292
0
0
Honestly? Yeah, I would. We have alot hereditary problems in the family, and I'm literally scared to death about having an un-healthy baby. I know it sounds horrible, but I want a normal child. Mainly because I myself inherited alot of these problem, and I don't think I'd be able to handle a child that would have to go through the same pain I did.
 

Rolling Thunder

New member
Dec 23, 2007
2,265
0
0
RedMenace said:
jthm said:
The real question this leads to is "if you'd do this, where does it stop?" If you can make your child a genius with a pill, would you do that too? If you could make them stronger, faster, smarter, better looking, etc. Would you? What happens to the children who's parents said no? Why are they disadvanted? What if you were that disadvanted child, how fair would it be?

As to your question though? Yes, I'd fix the child in the womb.
The answer is: They would realize that their parent are a bunch of hypocrites(?). They will struggle to prove that they are not inferior to the "engineered" humans, some might even be successful in that endeavor. And when they grow up and have kids of their own they WILL use all available mod methods to provide their child with same starting "parameters" as everyone else, so that their child will not feel inferior to others.

My answer is Yes times 2. Bring on the super soldier babies who can bend iron, read fine print from 100 meters away, and solve higher math problems in under a minute in their head.
Why? They'll cost more and the SAS will trounce them mercilessly, just like they do everyone else.
 

Plauged1

New member
Mar 6, 2009
576
0
0
I'd fix the defects, but I will rely on my own abilities on making the kid smart and strong. Is it not the whole point of the pill to make the kid healthy? You may want to touch up the second part a bit.
 

Arcticflame

New member
Nov 7, 2006
1,063
0
0
As long as they aren't changing all the genes, only the ones which are defective I'd have no troubles.

E.G. Change my baby nose to be smaller because I thought mine was too big = wrong.
But changing my baby's gene so it has properly functioning legs = Definitely.

Smart, strong, healthy child is a tough one. I'd like to say that we need both stupid and smart people, which is what I genuinely think, but at the same time I don't want a stupid baby. So I would definitely request my wife use it. D: And there certainly is a genetic disposition for stupidity which can be overcome, however has strong impact on a person.
Although once again, does it wipe the babies inheritance of genes clean? Because I wouldn't like that.

Strong and healthy aren't what make someone individual in my opinion, it's the mind that makes someone themselves. So that's why intelligence is a difficult one to decide.
 

Erana

New member
Feb 28, 2008
8,010
0
0
I wouldn't need a pill for my child to be smart. If they had medical issues, though, I might consider...

But if it were a Gattaca type scenario, definitely.
 

Silver

New member
Jun 17, 2008
1,142
0
0
I'd probably consider it, depending on how the options presented themselves. I doubt it'd be necessary though.
 

sequio

New member
Dec 15, 2007
495
0
0
Ideally i support yes and yes, but in practice i think so many things will go wrong i.e. making people that are defined universally to be sub-human for the purpose of slave labor.
 

ace_of_something

New member
Sep 19, 2008
5,995
0
0
I'm dyslexic and have lupus. I am doing fine and I wouldn't be the resilient, tenacious, and belligerent person.
I wouldn't be what I am today without my personal obstacles to overcome.