Overview and Analysis of the Possibilities of Genetic Engineering - Essay Example

? “We must guard against the increasing commodification of human life, its tissues and body parts ……which has the potential to debase human dignity and steer society towards a state where anything goes -  if you have the money”     Anon, 2010 Analyse the ethical basis of the views expressed in this quotation. Discuss any alternate views which are relevant to the topic and their ethical basis. Conclude by evaluating the effectiveness of any methods used to ‘guard against’ increasing commodification of human life. You are expected to use illustrative examples throughout and refer to primary literature.   "We must guard against the increasing commodification of human life, its tissues and body parts ……which has the potential to debase human dignity and steer society towards a state where anything goes - if you have the money" Anon, 2010 Analyse the ethical basis of the views expressed in this quotation. Discuss any alternate views which are relevant to the topic and their ethical basis. Conclude by evaluating the effectiveness of any methods used to 'guard against' increasing commodification of human life. You are expected to use illustrative examples throughout and refer to primary literature. Money, money, money: the availability of which opens doors to a lot of possibilities especially in the utilization of human body and/or culture for one’s pleasure. The definition of commodification is based on the Marxist political theory. According to which, anything without a value is given a certain value. This could be anything such as an identity or an idea. This shows how with time, the social values have been replaced by market values. Hence, commodification can be defined as the process whereby things are treated as commodities and market trade is expanded to areas that were non-market previously (Stilwell & Argyrous, 2003). Commodification in relation to people is characterized with genetic engineering, cloning, eugenics, social engineering, fascism, social Darwinism, mass marketing and employment. And the most active participants to these forms of human commodification are those with the resources. All these would be discussed further in the following paragraphs. Genetic engineering is referred to the science of manipulating the genetic contents in order to insert genes of desirable traits into the organism. This induction could be done directly to the organism or it could be through an external cell that is permeated with the organism. Genetic engineering does not include traditional breeding of species, and allows man to choose the genetic traits for its subject. When the genetic content of an organism is added to another host then the resultant is given the name of transgenic. Removing genetic content from an organism is also a part of genetic engineering. Genetic material is the commodity in subject, and when one has the capability and resources to acquire the desired genes the values in human reproduction and childbirth becomes skewed The same holds true for human cloning. Human cloning can be defined as the process of creating a twin that is a human being who is a copy of another person based on genetics. There is usually not derived from a single fertilized embryonic cell mass. There have been plethoras of ethical outburst related to the concept of cloning. There are two types of human cloning that are discussed more frequently. These are reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning. Reproductive cloning can be described is the development of cloned humans and is considered a crime in many parts of the world, hence, not done legally. The latter, therapeutic cloning is the area of cloning which uses human cells cloning for research and medicine. Another category which is rather novel is the replacement of damaged or failing body with the help of cloning supported by brain transplant. This type of cloning is referred to as replacement cloning. There have been supporters as well as opponents to the concept of cloning. Advocates argue that there is a considerable difference between using human embryo to develop human being and using lab research to produce stem cells and therapies. They argue that with the help of therapeutic cloning, medicine can reach new highs. Therapeutic cloning can be used to grow many sorts of tissue and hence, regenerate damaged or dead organs and cells. This can open a gateway not only to reconstructive and cosmetic surgery but also to the cure of many deadly diseases including diabetes, cancer and heart diseases. Moreover, there are a number of social implications relating to cloning. The process of cloning changes the structure of families, relationships and the society as a whole ( Biological and Environmental Research Information System BERIS, 2009). A widely popular biosocial movement near the beginning of the 20th century is the applied science of eugenics. Eugenics is basically a belief or practice that aims at improving the human species or population genetic composition with the help of encouraging reproduction by people who possess positive eugenics i.e. favorable genetic traits while discouraging reproduction by people having negative eugenics. The popularity of eugenics fell during the times of Nazi in Germany. It is believed by the community that eugenics is most allied with Nazi abuse due to the practices of human testing and extinction of undesired population. Nevertheless, by the later years of the 20th century there were series of research and innovation into many other reproductive technologies that raised moral and ethical questions over eugenics (National Library of Medicine, 2011). Social Darwinism is a belief that came into residence during the late Victorian era of the nineteen century. This ideology states that among the population, the strongest ad fittest should survive and prosper in the society where as the feeble could be allowed to die. It suggests that there should be no difference among the people who are self sufficient and those that are not. There are a number of past and present social policies and theories defined by social Darwinism that are believed to explain the rationale behind racism, capitalism and imperialism. Due to the stringent nature of the concept, it has a general impact over many people as they see it to be ignorant towards social responsibility and compassion. The theory implies a stress over competition among the people in free market capitalism as well as a struggle among national or racial groups. As a part of sociologist school of thought, social Darwinism suggest that the society is made up of natural forces that are powerful and assertive, these forces are similar to those that operate in animal or plant communities. Hence, social laws can seem as analogous to that of natural laws. The concept of the ‘survival of the fittest’ is pertinent here as when there are conflicts among social groups, the successful ones are those that more on in the evolutionary progress (Bowler, 2003). The concept of Social engineering is a phenomenon in political science which revolves around the manipulation and maneuvering of attitudes and behavior in the social context. Libertarians, traditionalists and free market thinkers are seen as most correlated with the use of social engineering against those who tend to alter the social mores or power relationships, which are that of men and women for example, with the use of tax policy, law and other regulatory influence (Popper, 1971). Fascism is an authoritarian nationalist political ideology. It is a belief of the fascists that in order to keep a nation strong it is a requirement of the nation to have well-built leadership, ability to commit violence or wage war and singular collective identity. Fascists do no believe in individualism as they assert that the creation of culture is through the national society as a whole and the identity of individuals is derived from culture. They support a nation is based upon a single-party state. The governments that are fascist tend to restrain any disagreement against the fascist state or movement. Some of the key traits of fascism include idolization, increase in violence and war. These traits are seen by the fascism as tools to make the society more powerful with better spiritual renovation, education, bringing in dominance in the character of people as well as building comradeship through the military services. This in turn allows selling of one’s human rights (Blamires & Jackson, 2006). Mass marketing is a well known marketing strategy that eliminates the segmentation of the market and catering to the entire market as a whole. It basically ignores the differences in the market and offers the product on a large scale. Mass marketing aims to reach a large number of people together. Some of the basic tools for mass marketing include Television, radio and newspaper as they broadcast to a wide range of audience. Products that are exposed to a wide audience are generally believed to return larger sales. Employment is viewed as the buying of human labour. Regarding employment, laws often prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender or gender identity, religion, political affiliation, language abilities, citizenship, medical condition or disability, and age. In the same fashion, commodification of other living beings is the use of animals for food, clothing, entertainment or testing (Hayes & Malone, 2009). Human commodification What is the price of a limb? What is the price of a child? What is the price of ethnicity? What is the price of love? What is the price of culture? In a world that is often ruled by buyers and sellers, as well as of demand and supply, those things that are often considered priceless become objects to be marketed and from which to earn a profit. Chia (2009) discusses further that commodification is not wrong per se, but its inappropriate application to entities which are not rightly commodities. In his book entitled, The Ethics of Human Organ Trading, Chia classified commodification into three important concepts: objectification, instrumentality, and fungibility. Objectification is treating a human person as a mere thing and thereby violating his dignity. Commodification becomes morally disagreeable when it is applied to human beings or human organs because of their intrinsic value. Instrumentalisation of human being, also a form of objectification, is the treating of a human person as a “means” to an end rather than as an “end” itself. The third concept is fungibility or interchange ability. Because the human being must be seen as a psychophysical unit worthy of respect, treating his body as fungible, by putting a price to the its parts (organs or tissues) or as a whole is a failure to properly respect the special dignity he possesses (Ertman & Williams, 2005) (Chia, 2009). In recent times, the body has become something that we do not own. The body has become a commodity that is traded, marketed, stolen, or even exchanged. This new commodification of human bodies and parts is aided with the advent of professions such as transplant surgeries, reproductive medicine and even journalism to some extent. There is now a global market place that is further expanding as the bodies are now propelled into commercial transactions in forms of organs, tissues, secretion and reproductive capacities, this is a generation of the ‘ethics of parts’ which has come up under the name of research and development (Scheper-Hughes & Wacquant, 2002). With the passage of time, there is a decrease in the number of organs needed for transplant as opposed to the number that is available. Scheper-Hughes & Wacquant (2002) discussed a situation where women chose to sell their kidneys in order to earn money to feed their family, which is the common reason for kidney sellers’ world - wide. These circumstances allow a commodified human body part to become a dilemma as it is a option of survival for the socially disadvantaged population while being an object of commercial transaction for the other. If a market system were to be used to distribute human transplant kidneys, and if the state acted as a kidney purchaser in such system, poverty would not preclude the poor from securing kidneys that they needed. Even though they might not be able to afford the kidneys and that they might not be covered by private health insurance plans that would purchase the organs for them, they could have the kidneys they medically needed purchased for them by the state (Taylor, 2005). Another diverse form of commodification is the recently increasing slavery or human trafficking, where the human body is treated as a item of trade. In the case of prostitution, sex becomes the traded commodity (Stilwell & Argyrous, 2003). Criticisms on human commodification With the passage of time and the advancement in information technology, the areas of biomedicine transplant surgery, genetic engineering, biotechnology and genomics have expanded the horizon of commodification of the body. This advancement has aided the exapnasion of global capitalism and speed at which bodies, organs, capital and technology can move around the world. Commodication of bodies is also pertinent with the increase in the desire and need of human bodies or organs for various reasons such as healing, dissection, religious edification, Research and experimentation (Scheper-Hughes & Wacquant, 2002). Modern medicine becoming dependent to organ donors is highly unlikely since there is an incessant increase in the demand for organs and tissues as the technology in the field of medicine progresses. The use of organs for practices that are necessary and ethically sound such as organ transaplant could justify commodificatio. furthermore, it is imperative to decrease the attitudes that consider commodification and decrease the practices that consider children as having choose-able parts (Widdows, 2007). Sheehan (1993) discusses on the criticisms on Marxist view on commodification of human. She states that the Marxist theory is wrong in its statement of people being misguided as they are more often than not well versed in differentiating their evaluation. It is important for people to correlate value to objects as it is this value that makes them realize the worth of things. With regards to contemporary economics, the value of an object is subjective. People are aware that having the value objective is nothing but delusion. It is wrong to say that people are forced around by the levels of prices as they have a freedom of choice and the ability to alter their behavior in order to chive what they want. The main factor that determines the value of an object is the usefulness of that object in practical aspects. Sheehan points out that Marx’s idea on commodification is exaggerated. They tend to evaluate and have valuations according to which they guide their behavior, they are well versed over the objects and human subjects characteristics and have an inherent power to control their wants in order to better manage money. The choice of deciding upon the life of person would become difficult if value relationships were considered beyond control. The use of fetishes is normally considered as a game that revolves around cherishing and loving objects. As per the argument, fetishes of objects that emerge from human principles of value relationships are against religious beliefs and are away from the traits of spiritual beliefs is another point raised by Sheehan. It is said that despite having fetishes of objects one could be a religious believer and follower; indeed it might be an integral part of one's religion to tear down the golden calf, i.e. to oppose idolatry in all forms (Sheehan, 1993). Conclusion Fears on the threats on human beings losing their human individuality and human identity are raised by several human rights organizations. Peters (2003) cautions the human society should continue to guard against the misuse of scientific and technological breakthroughs which could lead to commodification of human beings. Cloning as a “for sale” service in human reproduction can risk commodifying children – that is, cloning along with some other reproductive high tech services could risk treating children with quality control standards that might reduce them to merchandise. There is also a posing risk on the discrimination against cloned human beings (Peters, 2003). The human society should be ethically alert and take steps to protect the dignity of the future children. In human society, needs are continuously invented - and artificial scarcities becomes limitless. In a world that is often ruled by buyers and sellers, of demand and supply, those things that are often considered priceless become objects to be marketed and from which to earn a profit. “There are some things that money can’t buy, for everything else there’s Mastercard.” The credit card commercial very well states in its slogan that there are things that are priceless and should remain so. References Biological and Environmental Research Information System BERIS. (2009, May 11). Human Genome Project Information. Retrieved February 12, 2011, from Cloning Fact Sheet: http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/cloning.shtml#organsQ Blamires, C., & Jackson, P. (2006). World Fascism: A Historical Encyclopedia, Volume 1. Santa BArbara, California: USA: ABC-CLIO. Bowler, P. (2003). Evolution: The History of Idea. Universoty of California Press. Chia, R. (2009). The Ethics of Human Organ Trading. Armour Publishing Pte Ltd. Ertman, M., & Williams, J. (2005). Rethinking Commodification: Cases and Readings in Law and Culture. New York: NYU Press. European Parliament; Council of the European Union. (2001). Directive on the Release of Genetically Modified Organisms. Official Journal of the European Communities, 17. Hayes, T., & Malone, M. (2009). No Size Fits All: From Mass MArketing to Mass Handselling. Portfolio . National Library of Medicine. (2011, February 13). Retrieved February 14, 2011, from Unified Medical Language System (Psychological Index Terms) : http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/glossary=eugenics Peters, T. (2003). Science, Theology, and Ethics. Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Popper, K. (1971). The Open Society and its Enemies. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Scheper-Hughes, N., & Wacquant, L. (2002). Commodifying Bodies. SAGE. Sheehan, H. (1993). Marxism and the Philosophy of Science: A Critical History. Penguin Edition. Stilwell, F., & Argyrous, G. (2003). Economics as a Social Science. Victoria: Pluto Press Australia. Taylor, J. S. (2005). Stakes and Kidneys: Why MArkets in Human Body Parts are Morally Imperative. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Widdows, H. (2007). Persons and their Parts: New Reproductive Technologies and Risks of Commodification. Health Care Analysis, 36-46.   Read More