• Home
  • About the Course
  • Requirements
  • Schedule
  • Assignments

Psychology of Childhood and Adolescence in an Urban Context

Spring 2011

Feed on
Posts
comments

Giovanni’s Post

March 9, 2011 by Kim Rybacki

The controversy about designer babies has become a big one in the United States. According to CBS News, the technology used for making “designer babies” was originally created to screen for disease, it is called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis or PGD, and I believe that is all it should be used for. I do not like that this technology can be used to pick a baby’s gender, eye color and other physical features. By choosing a baby’s physical features, we are affecting out natural biological inheritance. Natural heredity won’t be possible anymore if you can choose your baby’s traits. In addition, by altering our genotype, we will alter our phenotype as well. A change in a person’s genotype could alter the entire way a person’s phenotype would have developed naturally. On the other hand, the technology used for designer babies that helps detect diseases is a great way to help young children grow up to live their lives free of disease. Many genetic disorders can be detected early or even prevented from developing. This would be a major step in reducing the suffering of many distressed children and parents who have to deal with genetic disorders such as Down’s syndrome, sickle cell anemia, and many others.

There is also a difference in the logic behind using PGD to screen and correct genetic disorders versus choosing a child’s gender. If one uses PGD to correct chromosomal genetic disorders, they are correcting an abnormality in the child’s chromosome count. I believe that it is okay to be able to change an abnormality in the chromosomes to prevent a disorder but it is not okay to just change chromosomes just because a couple wants to have a boy or a girl. In my opinion, why should you change something that has nothing wrong with it. It is better to let it be natural and let the natural flow of heritability continue. I don’t think just being able to pick out gender and physical characteristics will make us that much happier as people. However, combating genetic disorders, that is something on a whole different scale; as a result, everyone can have the chance to their lives to the fullest by being healthy. I believe that PGD should be focused on genetic problems that can make a difference. For me, choosing a baby’s physical characteristics is a luxury and we should be focused more on necessities.

Posted in Nature/Nurture: Genes and Culture | No Comments



Comments are closed.

  • EDU 1101 Calendar

    March 2011
    S M T W T F S
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031  
    « Feb   Apr »
  • Comments

    • Kim Rybacki on Shortcomings of Education System in U.S.
    • Kim Rybacki on “Designer” Babies
    • Kim Rybacki on
  • Categories

  • RSS NYT > Psychology and Psychologists

    • Are Millennials ‘Childless’ or ‘Child Free’? June 8, 2025
      Readers respond to a guest essay by Michal Leibowitz. Also: Is America no longer a beacon?
    • The 100-Year-Old Psychologist Is Still Listening June 8, 2025
      But with her memory suddenly starting to fail, she faces a difficult decision.
      Julie Besonen and Sarah Blesener
    • ‘The Protocol’: The Story Behind Medical Care for Transgender Kids June 6, 2025
      A new six-part podcast explores the story of medical treatment for transgender young people — how the care began, the lives it changed, and the legal and political fights that could end it in the U.S.
      Azeen Ghorayshi and Austin Mitchell
    • My Friend Lied About Her Income. Can I Still Trust Her? June 5, 2025
      She doesn’t think she did anything wrong.
      Lori Gottlieb

Theme: MistyLook by Sadish. Powered by WordPress MU.