It is a rather stark thought that someday parents will be able to go beyond simply weeding out these unwanted physical traits by electing to increase their child’s intellect or life expectancy by tweaking their biological DNA. It is every parent’s dream for their child to grow up to be successful and happy, but it is narcissistic and selfish to want to try and design a purpose and a destiny for that child. Human life ultimately cannot be controlled. What happens when their child makes different choices than what it was designed to do?
Designer babies will not solve our fundamental problems as human beings; in fact it will feed into our egos, our greed, and our desire to control others. In addition, there are many external factors that do influence a child, which nobody can control - not even the best of scientists. For it is social situations such as relationships and experiences that inevitably determine our identities. It is, therefore, undeniably ridiculous to think that parents can control a child’s life. There are factors such as fate and luck which will always play a role. Anyhow, who is society to say that all flaws are self-detrimental? One only needs to remember the likes of Jon Nash, Nobel Prize winner for Economics and Vincent Van Gough. One could argue it was their mental states which established their brilliance.
Conditions such as manic depression and schizophrenia are frequently labelled in a negative way in society. The world is a multi cultural environment: people suffer from illness and disabilities every day. It is human support and sympathy that makes us stronger creatures to survive. If genetic engineering made us all a perfect race the world would inevitably become unspeakably selfish.
The creation of designer babies who lack flaws will force even those parents who opposed, to retreat in order to ensure that their children conform to society’s ever growing demand to be perfect. Ordering an appearance and a personality can lead to huge social disadvantages. Will the children of tomorrow be individuals? Or will they be material assets crafted by their parents and stripped of their uniqueness?
Breeding perfection has proven a very risky concept on countless occasions. One example is the Nazis’ barbaric quest for a blonde, blue-eyed race of Aryans in the Second World War. Nowadays however, you do not have to look far to see similar examples of people wanting perfected eugenics. Throughout history, humans have always strived for perfection. Ultimately, however, it can never be attained without dangerous consequences such as social isolation and conflict.
On the other hand, genetic engineering might be beneficial in ways such as pre-implantation genetic diagnosis to prevent the next generation from inheriting genetic diseases. However, the expense of genetic engineering would mean only the rich could buy disease free ‘super babies’. Class differences between the rich and poor will become genetic differences and some think that eventually humans could even split into two different breeds. Professor Lee Silver, of Genetics at Princeton University, states, “The problem with this technology is that it will disadvantage every child whose parents are unable to afford it. So the bottom part of society is going to be the place where all of these diseases lay out and the top part of society is going to get rid of them”. Therefore this poses the dilemma: Will our government and our society, which is controlled by the richest people in our society, care?
In conclusion, children are no longer valued for their unique and quirky traits but have been turned into a status symbol of lifestyle perfection like a Prada handbag or a Chanel necklace. It is without a doubt that designer babies will never just be sold alone. As with all life forms there comes the promise of social problems and hardship which threaten success. Genetic engineering, it seems, is society’s solution to evolving as eternally perfect and successful beings. This technology, however, introduces risks which threaten to destroy the very foundation and dimensions of our planet which we have learned to live in and which we value. Not only is greater separation of social classes expected, but also loss of identity and individuality. Charles Darwin once said: It is human nature to evolve. But with the process of evolution, there comes the key ingredient of responsibility. It is therefore necessary to protect and legislate against immoral uses of genetic engineering, where it is used to feed society’s grotesque aspirations for perfection. Mother Nature need not be the only force at play but her integrity should always be considered.
