I'm choosing to blog about Robertson's paper, because 1.) it was an easier read compared to Callahan's, and 2.) i really enjoyed reading Robertson's article.
I though was Robertson had to say was very interesting. I liked reading about the different battles that have been presented in regards to assisted reproduction. There are many different views regarding assisted reproduction. Many think its is morally wrong, some thing it is a waste of embryos, while others support the idea of science expanding its knowledge on how to "change" "delete", or simply figure out what genes their children will get when they reproduce.
I think science is doing what is should be doing, we rely on scientist to find cures,and new ways to address coming ideas and concerns. Whether that be for a disease, illnesses, or the new and exciting discovery of genes, and how they are becoming able to change a persons genetic code. I think scientist have discovered something that is vary valuable and in need for certain circumstances and conditions.
I agree and approve of the idea that we can have genetic work done on our children before they are born. I think it is important for for people to have these options available to them, especially if disease and illnesses run in the family, it would be to their advantage to know what they can possibly expect their children to have, and learn how to deal with those issues. However I do not support the idea that people are wanting to spend an outrageous amount of money to have their child's DNA changes, because they want these so called"perfect" children. I don't think people should have children if they do not want the surprise of what they are capable of "naturally" producing. If you want to your child to have blue eyes, small figure, and brown hair, then you are not having children for the right reason and frankly shouldn't have kids. I think they need to draw a clear line between having these procedures done for the avoidance of disease and illnesses and having them done for the pure pleasure of wanting your child to be "perfect".
If I'm ever given the opportunity to have a deeper understanding of my genes, for the sake of my health and prevention purposes, I will take that opportunity and appreciate what science has made available.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As you get to the middle of your posting you settle in on a clear statement of a key "stake" in the assisted reproduction/genetic modification battle—the freedom (or not) to modify BUT not without a limiting line that ought not be crossed. The dispute, of course, will be between you and those who YOU have gone to far, and between YOU and those YOU think have themselves gone too far. I'm guessing this question of "where's the line" will come up several times between now and the end of the term. You may want to keep your eye out for other circumstances where line-drawing is a key issue (a chiasmatic issue as it turns out).
ReplyDelete