Does Genetic Engineering Dehumanize the Parents and Children Involved in Genetic Manipulation - Article Example

Does genetic engineering somehow dehumanize the parents and children involved in genetic manipulation? Or is it simply an advancement of our species? Spar (213, 216) indicates genetic engineering is a process that results into a change of one’s genetic composition for medical benefits via use of gene therapy. Spar (214) argues gene therapy is achieved through use of germ-line cells (germ-line therapy) and somatic cells (somatic-line therapy). Spar (212-237) provides that medical genetic engineering involves extraction of genetic sample suspected to contain abnormalities, diagnosis of genes responsible for genetic diseases or abnormalities and correction of the genetic defects through targeted insertion of new genes with superior desirable qualities. Spar (223) indicates medical genetic engineering is carried through combined extraction of reproductive cells, in vitro-fertilization, embryo screening for genetic defects or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. This essay looks into consequences of designing human beings, benefits obtained from designer baby genetic engineering experiments, level and role of government in controlling medical genetic engineering experiments and if children should be created in order to ensure their siblings and relatives lead a better life. Spar (216) indicates Ancient Greece genetic engineering was in the past been used to steer human breeding where children with unwanted characteristics were left to die, infants with physical deformities were killed at birth and check up of babies by council of elders in Sparta after birth was used as a measure of a child’s potential to be of help to the state1. Spar (216) and Roosevelt (282-291) indicate human breeding led into imposition of sterilization for people who exhibited characteristics associated with criminality and illiteracy based on argument that ‘it was better to prevent defective offspring from being born than supporting them through life’. Spar (227) indicates that genetic engineering is associated with misdiagnosis that can lead into genetic problems. For instance, if the inserted gene takes precedence over the regulator gene in the DNA, then regulator gene fails to carry out its biological role. The DNA regulator gene codes for a repressor substance that inhibits operator gene when an enzyme for a metabolic reaction is not required. The DNA promoter region activates structural gene under the influence of regulator gene. If a mistake occurs during insertion and targets the mechanisms of regulator gene, synthesis of enzymes may go on uninterrupted leading into cancerous condition or autoimmunity. There are also fears that the inserted gene may become part of an intron (forming a parasitic portion of a DNA that will end up being reproduced into generations and which is translated into messenger RNA but discarded during translation. A single faulty base in one intron has been shown to cause short defective β-haemoglobin to be released which is not properly edited and spliced. If this happens to a homozygous recessive person, the person suffers from thalassaemia major which is characterized by anemia, growth retardation and other genetic abnormalities that affect the health of the subject. Galton (35) argues that genetic engineering could be used to catalyze eugenics2 efforts; necessity to produce people with particular characteristics (Spar 216-220). Genetic engineering can be used to transfer debilitating diseases to people of inferior qualities. Spar (220) indicates genetic engineering and need for human breeding led into imposition of involuntary euthanasia in patients who had genetic debilitating diseases. Additionally, Spar (220) provides that human breeding based on social objectives led into marking of children with positive or negative signs to indicate their possibility to live or die respectively. Spar (212) indicates genetic engineering has made it possible for transfer of genetic diseases to be prevented to inborn babies from their parents. Spar (212-213) suggests that genetic engineering has made it possible for parents to have healthy children that are free from any genetic disorders that either of the parent may have (213), determination of gender of the baby (214), determination of chromosomal disorders present in the embryos (223), helped to save lives of children who have debilitating diseases like Fanconi anemia, β-thalassaemia, Duchenne Muscular dystrophy, familial hypercholesterolaemia and sex linked genetic disorders like hemophilia (227) through delivery of a second child to save the first child. Spar (223) indicates genetic engineering has made it possible for parents to get genetic tests that are important in genetic counseling after the parents are diagnosed for any recessive genes that can be transferred to their babies. Spar (224) indicates that through intervention of medical procedures like pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, the incidence rates of abortion have been reduced. Spar (237) indicates that the government should have control over medical genetic engineering in order to protect public interests over designer babies (238). Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis is a medical procedure that was designed to detect genetic disorders (213) and its use in determining sex of a baby does not amount into preventing a genetically related disease. Spar (237) argues there should be a government policy that should control medical genetic engineering. This is because pre-implantation genetic diagnosis has been used to screen embryos for non-medical reasons like determination of gender, intelligence and physical characteristics like height (212). The medical system has physicians who provide pre-implantation genetic diagnosis services that have no medical benefit but have personal values for persons that seek them like breast enlargement, hair replacement and ultra-sound assisted lipo-suction. Spar (237-238) indicates that government policy on genetic engineering would ensure that the procedure is not used to transfer viral materials that can lead into mass deaths of people with inferior characteristics. Spar (227) indicates that pre-implantation genetic diagnosis is affected by safety concerns that stimulate ethical and moral considerations on its application with respect to the safety of the mother and the child. The government should have control over the pre-implantation genetic diagnosis due to limitation of investigation on safety of the subjects and their progeny. Spar (221) proposes that there is limited data on potential effects of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis in the later pre-implantation genetic diagnosis life of the child and therefore parents who do not have any genetic disorders should not be allowed to pursue pre-implantation genetic diagnosis as an option for healthy child delivery. This is subject to genetic errors and mistakes that could occur during the procedure of in vitro fertilization and targeted insertion of the gene with parent’s desirable characteristics. There are also no data on possible risks that are associated with the techniques like amniocentesis, in vitro fertilization, embryo screening and finally pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. The government should take part in regulating pre-implantation genetic diagnosis because the government is likely to be open for charges because of not addressing discrimination. The parents’ choice of sexual orientation of their child is subject to prevalence or non-existence of heterosexual laws on genetic engineering that raises morally objectable public and private interests. The government should ensure there are policies that define investigational procedures like in vitro fertilization and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. The governments should revise policies that define genetic engineering subjects as only ‘living individuals’ since the definition of the subjects does not include embryo. Most of federal guidelines on investigational procedures are applicable only after fetus implantation has been done and do not consider the lifeline before the implantation of the fetus. Spar (235-237) argues that necessity of medical genetic engineering is not about demonstrating what is necessary but should be a function of value judgment. Spar (236) indicates that some medical conditions caused by faulty genes may be treated through convectional means hence pre-implantation genetic diagnosis need not be carried out regardless of whether it is backed up by legal or medical reasons. For instance, giving children with faulty genes that predispose phenylketonuria a special diet manages the condition. Use of genetic engineering is not a likely solution to all medical solutions like cystic fibrosis, phenylketonuria or sickle cell condition because these are exceptions, not the rule (230). Spar (221) indicates that eugenics and involuntary sterilization undermined human right namely ‘the right to have offspring’. Spar (221) provides that pre-implantation genetic diagnosis will reduce the rates women procure abortion (230). The parents will be able to bear children that are free from genetic defects hence help to reduce healthcare costs (Spar 230). Spar (215-234) indicates that children that have genetic disorders are likely to lead a happy life before the onset of severe clinical signs of the genetic diseases. By the time of the onset the clinical signs, Spar (216-233) indicates that new treatment may be invented that does not require organ transplant or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Spar (221-233) indicates parents’ expectation on desirable qualities of the children may fail to be met and this could bring about failure of the children to conform to the parent’s standards. This non-compliance of the designer babies to meet parents’ desirable characteristics could affect the parental bonding because the designer baby is a parent’s project to procreate. The designer babies are therefore considered as useful objects that should satisfy parents’ desirable features as opposed to valuable individuals who have parental attachment emotionally, morally and socially. Spar (233) proposes that health insurance firms may play a leading role into manipulating parents to adopt PGD as a measure to avoid possible genetic diseases that may affect their children. Spar (214) indicates that physicians have greater control over the embryos that are used for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Spar (214) suggests this occurs where the male husband has sex-linked genes for genetic disorders which would imply any male child born has a 100% probability to have the genetic defects. The physician in the best interest of the baby would use only the X-chromosomes of the male which would result into delivery of baby girls. The lack of parents’ involvement in choosing desirable characteristics in the embryo could result into embryos with minimal parental genes and characteristics. Spar (214) indicates that some special scenarios characterized by infertility of both parents can occur coupled by inability of the mother to carry the pregnancy to full term. This means the parents have no choice but to have both sperm and ovum donated and to look for a surrogate mother. This leads in a situation where the baby has a possible five parents. The parents chosen may not have desirable characteristics that the parents may want. There are also ethical concerns, moral and emotional concerns about the surrogate mother who should give birth to the child and hand over to the parents. There are complex issues related with polygenic characteristics that revolve around interaction among genes, between genes and environmental impact that could restrict parents potential to shape the characteristics of their designer baby that is born via pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Spar (237) indicates that adoption of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis as a procedure for managing reproductive problems is an expensive exercise because the chances of getting an embryo that genetically meets parents required desirable characteristics is minimal. This procedure would also bring about social strata and stigmatize the poor in a community because the poor’s financial status does not provide them with an opportunity to have healthy babies through pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Spar (225) indicates that the procedure of in vitro fertilization in search for a healthy embryo involves many abortions. This has an effect of eroding moral status that are accorded embryos and doesn’t respect the sanctity of life. The process of abortions breaches the goals of individual rights like the moral and legal protection of fundamental human interests like the right to live, the right of a child to be supported, the right of a child to have friends and right of a child to a conducive environment. The mothers who procure abortions will suffer physical, emotional and psychological problems. Spar (236-237) indicates that authority to pursue pre-implantation genetic diagnosis rests on parents and there is nothing wrong with embryo biopsy. The concerns on delivering or creating a child to save another rests with the informed consent of the patient, the baby whose life is to be saved. Medically, there is not consent of the patient or donor (the created baby) that is obtained because both are incompetent due to age and mental capacity. The procedure of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis over-assumes the best interests of the patient. Does the donor baby have any interests on the recipient baby? Parents cause bodily harm to their children who loose the right to have friends, the right to live, the right to environment and the right to have parental support. Therefore, pre-implantation genetic diagnosis is a threat to the foundation of parent-child relationship that is a function of unconditional love. Spar (235-236) indicates there are no parents who would want designer babies as pre-implantation amounts into adoption and worship of eugenics that caused a lot of human discrimination. In conclusion, genetic engineering dehumanize the parents and their children that are involved in genetic manipulation and does not constitute advancement of species because genetic engineering has no supporting data to show that it is a form of human evolution. Bibliography Galton, F. Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope and Aims. In Galton, Essays in Eugenics). London and New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 35, 1985. Roosevelt, T. ""Address Before the National Congress of Mothers:." Reprinted in Presidential Addresses and State Papers of Theodore Roosevelt. Part III (1905): pps. 282-291. Spar, D.L. The Baby Business: How money, Science and Polictics Drive the Commerce of conception. Harvard: Harvard Business Publishing Corporation, 2006. Read More