This week we have discussed about whether genetic
selection should be allowed. There is a situation like this: the male members
of a person’s family often suffer from a rare and unpleasant disease. That person
would therefore like to make sure she has a baby girl. Personally, I think it
is reasonable for her to conduct a genetic selection if the modern technology
allowed her to do so.
First of all, it is different from knowing
the baby’s gender through test. This case assumes that she can choose the
gender. Therefore, there is nothing to do with abortion which people sometimes
do when they do not get their babies of preferred gender.
Secondly, people want a girl or a boy for
certain reasons. If parents want a girl only because they think a girl is quieter,
the reason is surely not strong enough. However, in this case, genetic
selection is for medical rather than for social. Surely there are people who
can accept this kind of disease. I admit this is a very noble thought and I
appreciate them, but we cannot require everybody to be noble. Wanting a healthy
baby is not an immoral demand but a reasonable request. And if we can have one
without hurting anyone else, why cannot we accept it?
People who disagree may argue that genetic
selection goes against nature. I am not sure whether this is right, but I want
to compare genetic selection with the law that does not allowed close relatives
get married. This is common sense that close relatives cannot get married so
that people can avoid some diseases. And most of us accept and follow this idea.
Similarly, the purpose of genetic selection is also to avoid inherited
diseases. To some extent, avoiding marriage between close relatives is just a
kind of genetic selection. This law does not allow people to select directly,
but it encourages people to exclude some genes combination. Now I want to ask,
does this ban go against nature?
In conclusion, I think genetic selection
should be allowed in the above situation.
It's quite an excellent blog!!! Your language is fluent as usual and the logic is very clear. The last but two paragraph shows your critical thinking and it's also very reasonable. For me, I really agree with you that for some certain reasons such as to avoid the potential genetic diseases, It makes sense for human beings to conduct genetic selections. I think it’s actually cruel to give birth to a baby who is known cannot have a long lifespan. Although it is said that the genetic selection may change the gender rate of the Earth, as there is only a small number of people have to conduct the genetic selection and there are also quite many natural factors that can cause the change of the gender rate, so I think it doesn’t matter for some individuals to do so.
ReplyDeleteVery clear explanation and very convincing examples! Thank you for your sharing, Lingzi. I agree with you that genetic selection of proper intention should be allowed and accepted. Although it is a fact that genetic selection is against nature regulations, I just want to ask the oppositions a question: how many things we human beings have done are not against the future? Things like controlling the weather or reclaiming the seas for land are very persuasive instances. If we had entirely gone with the nature, we would not lead such a comfortable life nowadays.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of genetic selection, I have to say that, apart from the medical factors, we should also take moral fsctors in to account. If the purpose is to avoid some diseases, but not to do something that may change the original gene which may lead serious results, I agree with you. By the way, your blogger is so academic and professioal that I can learn a lot from viewing your blogger!
ReplyDelete