Designer Babies???

At first when I saw this prompt I was going to bring up the insurance issue (after all, mentioning it at the first lecture got a bit of a chuckle out of Robin...) but seeing as the topic has already been discussed I shall take a different angle.

I'm going to start by mentioning Carl Elliot and "A New Way to be Mad", though only as a springboard into other issues. In terms of biopolitics and determining what sorts of wild and wacky procedures, medications, etc. are acceptable in today's society and deciding where we as a society draw the line, I think Elliot brings up some relevant points during his interviews with several apotemnophiliacs who have successfully become amputees. Many of them express happiness with their decisions and say they are much better off now then before their operation or accident. None of them feel that their decisions affect the lives of others, they do not demand special treatment from others.

In class we talked about people taking Prozac and saying that they 'are themselves' only when on the medication. They are not affecting the lives of others by paying for their prescriptions, only working to better themselves. Individuals with gender identity disorder have sex change operations performed and say they are much happier afterwards. This procedure does not affect the lives of others, and once again the individuals are happy with their decisions. People all over the world opt to have cosmetic surgeries performed all the time. These people get more attractive noses, bigger breasts and butts, tinier waists, and less wrinkly faces. Their decision brings them happiness and doesn't affect anyone else.

In terms of what we should allow people to do, I think your body is your own. If you want no legs, bigger boobs, pierced ears, a penis instead of a vagina, go right ahead. It is your decision. But as soon as the things you do to your body affect others, that is where the line is drawn. There are discussions about building 'designer' babies. Couples can go in and have certain traits removed from their eggs and sperm. In most cases I have heard of this only in cases where a family is predisposed to certain illnesses, cancer, Parkinson's, and the like. But what is to stop these people from requesting a blue eyed baby girl?

I was very surprised to hear that judges ruled it legal for the deaf couple to use these techniques to make sure their baby was also deaf. While the line is very fine in this debate, and technically I see the benefits of helping prevent cancer in a person, I can see the technology being abused and soon we will end up in a society like that in "Brave New World" where every aspect of our development ensures that we will behave a certain way, look a certain way. That is completely unfair to the person whose life is being decided for them.

While the line between ethical and unethical is still being determined and many aspects of it will always be cloudy and open to interpretation, I believe that we must not begin making biological decisions for people. Part of our individuality is defined by the randomness of our genetics, and taking that away would in essence kill a part of ourselves.