Should Parents Be Permitted to Choose the Gender of Their Child

Genetic Engineering

What is Genetic Engineering? What is its purpose?

Dr. Ricarda Steinbrecher of San Francisco State University explains that "genetic engineering" is also called "genetic modification," or "genetic manipulation" (Steinbrecher, 1998). The three titles for the same process really refer to " ... the reshuffling of genes usually from one species to another," and the "basic biology" behind genetic engineering begins with the smallest living unit, the cell. Humans have 3,000,000,000,000 cells, and the cells are stacked together to form tissues, organs, and skin, for example, and in plants, cells make up leaves, fruit, trees, and the rest of the natural world; living things.

Genetic engineering uses technologies to alter the genetic makeup of cells, including "the transfer of genes within and across species boundaries to produce improved or novel organisms" (Union of Concerned Scientists -- ucsusa.org). When a gene is moved from one plant or animal to another, it "transfers those traits"; and hence, genetic engineering is not the same as "classical plant and animal breeding" (ucsusa.org). Classical breeding is based on "traits"; for example a farmer could breed a yellow cow to a brown cow, and a new color will have been developed in the offspring. But genetic engineering goes further than changing traits; it inserts genetic material that has been manipulated to be able to extract it from its original source and " ... successfully insert it in functioning order in target organisms" (ucusa.org).

On the YouTube video the speaker explains the purpose of genetic engineering: it allows an organism to "perform certain functions that it usually cannot perform" by targeting genes "in specific organs and tissues of the body without "affecting genes in the sperm or egg" (Emily Miller YouTube video). The video points out that in order to "correct genes" that have brought deadly diseases like cystic fibrosis to patients.

What are some moral issues surrounding genetic engineering? In Chapter 4 the author explains that because of genetic engineering, "giving birth to a baby with birth defects" is a matter of "voluntary parental choice" -- not just "brute bad luck" (Chapter 4). New technology makes it possible to "prevent the birth of children with genetic conditions"; the parents of an unborn child that has been diagnosed with birth defects may be duty-bound to utilize genetic screening, "or test a fetus to avoid subjecting a child to great pain or harm" (Chapter 4, p. 4).

However there are critics of genetic engineering that assert using genetic testing technologies to use a specific embryo or fetus, while passing on others, is taking "reproductive freedom too far"; the upshot of this morality criticism is based on the idea that the technology allows humans to "play God" by deciding which unborn infant's life is worth delivering into the world, and which unborn child isn't worth living (Chapter 4, p. 4). Moreover, when genetic testing is used to confirm " ... paternity sex selection of a fetus for family balancing reasons," but the informed consent of all parties involved has not been achieved, that is an ethical issue (www.genetics.edu.au).

What are the justifications for eugenics? According to Lombardo's writing, eugenics was "widely accepted" by Americans in the 20th century; "coercive legislations and public-health justifications" to limit the basic right of some people to have babies were common (Lombardo). If a person had a history of crime, or poverty, or mental imbalances, using eugenics was justified under the idea that human society could be improved by "selective mating"; also, crime, poverty and disease could be "eradicated" if the reproduction processes of "socially deviant individuals" could be limited or prevented (Lombardo).

How did Buck v. Bell, Skinner v. Oklahoma, and Loving v. Virginia impact the efforts to challenge eugenic laws? Buck v. Bell (SCOTUS) upheld a law in Virginia that allowed the sexual sterilization of "genetically unfit" people; the High Court ruled that eugenics was helping to protect the health of Virginia citizens (Lombardo). As to Skinner v. Oklahoma, the High Court ruled that Oklahoma's law (justifying sterilization of "genetically unfit" people) was not constitutional. Meantime Loving v. Virginia was also ruled unconstitutional by the High Court; the 1924 Virginia Racial Integrity Act prohibiting interracial marriage was ruled unconstitutional in 1967. The freedom to marry and to reproduce was upheld in that case (Lombardo).

What's the distinction between individual eugenics and population eugenics -- and between positive eugenics and negative eugenics? Individual eugenics refers to certain activities that are intended to "permit individuals to endow their children and their subsequent offspring with desired results"; in other words, a couple might want a boy because they already have a girl, so they use individual eugenics (Caplan). Population eugenics has to do with society, or large numbers of people; laws and policies can attempt to impact a country or state in the matter of public health testing for possible defects in unborn children. Positive eugenics refers to the offering of rewards or incentives to increase a population's interest in promoting "certain genes"; "ideal" mothers and fathers would be encouraged under Positive eugenics to have lots of babies in order to create "ideal" children (Caplan). Negative eugenics refers to the unethical prohibitions on sexual relations between so-called undesirable people.