Genetic selection enables people to change the genes of the baby before birth, that is to say they can choose superior characteristics to reduce the risk of genetic diseases. It’s topical because in a not too distant future it may be a reality. What are the impacts on society? In a first part, we will see the positive aspects of this practice and in a second part, we will see the negative aspects.
Genetic selection may be a good idea because if the baby is sick and has infected genes, then these genes may be modified or replaced by other genes, which may allow the baby to be born without disease and not to suffer? In addition, it will prevent parents from giving up the baby if they have the means to save it because it often happens that parents refuse to have a child with a serious illness.
However, this gene modification may not be 100% effective. We don’t really know the result, we don’t know if it will work really. In addition, to call a professional for this operation could be very expensive and some will think that this practice is not natural because it is a modification of the human body. The genes of the real parents are modified so that the body of the baby is not natural. With this practice, we search of the ‘perfect baby’ that would cause the rejection of other sick people.
We can therefore conclude that genetic selection has more negative than positive aspects. We think that this new technology would not be a good idea because there is too much constraint and this can lead to conflict and debate between people.
Personally I agree with this process because it can simply save the life of a sick baby. How a person can be against this process and let a baby die just because people think that genetic selection is not natural. The parents of the sick children should don’t care about the point of view of people around them. It concern only the parents of the sick children. If a day i got a baby, I will do this process to save him and see him grow.
I’m against the idea of «genetic selection ».l can
né àgood thing because it may reduce the risk of a baby getting genetic diseases.Another good factor is that it can modify infected genes so that the baby won’t suffer when it’s born.But the big problem is that ,like said in the document ,the gene modification may not be efficient on a hundred percent .It is alsoan providethe seeked effect on the baby’s genes.I find that it shouldn’t be practiced because it’s not a hundred percent sure and that it is expensive which means it’s a high risk.I think is not great to do this experience by if is an extremely serious case. Change the genes of baby this is like : we change her nature the ADN of parents. I think, we should to accept the baby as is it with deseases. It’s just my point of view.
For me, this is not good because if we want to have children it’s power assumed with its defects and quality . It’s the cycle of life .
I agree with what you said above all the phrase « that genetic selection has more negative than positive aspects. » Certainly it’s a good idea for sick babies, disabled. But it is not sure that its 100%, it is a very expensive operation which prevents some people to do this operation. With this operation it will not be a natural child that could be dangerous and make disagreements and conflicts with some people.
this can be a solution to not have a baby with serious diseases. This is not natural and can cause more harm than good. Perfection does not exist and we must accept it. All these practices are very expensive and at what price are we ready to go to achieve perfection? Every human being must be accepted as he is and even if this baby is sick he will still have the right to the love of his parents.
I am not for this practice. For me this practice is not natural because the parents will search the « perfect baby ». This is a practice very expansive and dangerous. I agree with you when you say « that genetic selection has more negative than postive aspects ». In the futur maybe the children will have health problem and body malformation.