Think about what Babe Ruth, Albert Einstein, Shawn Johnson and Diane Lane all have in common.
Babe, with his hands gripped tightly around a bat, once made the crowd hush in awe. Einstein was able to easily calculate numbers, mixed with letters, and so forth, in only a matter of seconds. Olympic gold medalist Shawn Johnson continues to twist flawlessly and flip her body into various mesmerizing contortions. Actress Diane Lane, at age 43, is still as beautiful as ever.
These four people have succeeded in life because of their strong passions, which ultimately drove them to success. Some characteristics may have been genetic or natural. Those traits passed down from their parents, enabled them to be born with an innate ability to excel.
The key word here is natural. If everyone were born with the same capabilities and talents as these four were, then no one in this world would be considered “special.” No one in this world would be considered famous, or be able to run faster, or think quicker, or have better physical features than the other — everyone would be the same.
Not one of the previously listed people was genetically altered as an embryo. Not one of them was subjected to the combined processes of preimplantation genetic diagnosis and in vitro fertilization.
The process of genetically altering embryos using PGD combined with IVF should be considered illegal.
The combination of these processes allow for the creation of “savior siblings” which are unethical in nature. A savior sibling is “a child selected as a result of genetic screening to have some innate characteristic that will help save the life of an existing brother or sister,” according to the entry for “savior sibling” taken from WorldWideWords.com.
By using PGD, we are creating a life solely to save another life. This coincides with the Kantian idea of practical imperative. This idea suggests that people shouldn’t use others in order to obtain personal goals or to seek an unfair advantage.
Parents shouldn’t be using these helpless embryos as spare body parts. Many of the embryos that are not implanted into the mother’s uterus are left to disintegrate or are used in scientific experiments.
According to the president’s Council on Bioethics, “there is no comprehensive, uniform, or enforceable mechanism for data collection, monitoring or oversight relating to the use and disposition of human embryos in the context of clinical practice or research”.
However, the creation of savior siblings isn’t the only criticism of PGD and IVF. These processes combined can also create “designer babies” and ultimately have the power to disrupt humanity.
If all humans were meant to be skinny, pretty, blue-eyed with good hair, smart, athletic, and be perfect in every way, then that is the condition in which this world would already be, right?
When we start to genetically alter the genes of our children we are starting to mess around with evolution. Natural selection becomes not so natural and the concept of “survival of the fittest” is thrown out the window.
“If we’re going to produce children who are claimed to be superior because of their particular genes, we risk introducing new sources of discrimination in society,” stated Marcy Darnovsky, associate director of the Center for Genetics Society. If we continue to enhance our healthy children, what would our message be to society?
Today as Americans we are already faced with class differences that have the potential to evolve into genetic differences. Will we soon be classified as “gen-rich,” those who possess the magic genes, and “gen-poor,” the majority of what we, as humans, are today?
Our society has the potential to be great, to be every so often blessed with the athleticism of Babe Ruth or the bewitching routines of Shawn Johnson. But these incredible individuals are meant to be sporadic — to come and pass — and most of all, to be natural.
The insufficient laws concerning PGD allow for both parents and doctors to join forces in an open playing field.
PGD is not formally monitored in the United States. There is no limit to what a parent can ask for, and no limit to the outrageous possibilities a practicing doctor could fathom. The only established guideline allowing for a method to be moved from scientific testing to the clinical realm is the approval of two peer-reviewed papers showing that the risk/benefit ratio is “acceptable.”
“PGD will allow parents to choose the child they want, not simply reject the ones they don’t want. It will change the overriding purpose of IVF, from a treatment for fertility, to being able to pick and choose embryos like consumer goods — producing many, discarding most, and desiring only the chosen few,” claimed Stephen Baird, author of “Designer Babies: Eugenics Re-packaged or Consumer Goods.”
The method of combining PGD with IVF to alter the genetics of embryos needs to be considered rationally. Impulsively creating “savior siblings” and “designer babies” under inadequate laws is a recipe for disaster.