" Designer Babies" by Patricia Smith- Is Genetically Designing Babies Ethical?

The May 12th edition of Upfront magazine contains an article titled “Designer Babies,” by Patricia Smith. This article outlines the efforts scientists are making to engineer genetically altered babies, and the contemporary ideals and controversy surrounding this topic.  After reading and analyzing this passage, I concluded that genetically designing babies is not a smart idea for many reasons.  This belief, I realized reflects largely on my morals and ethics.

Designing a baby is potentially dangerous to the baby’s health. While many scientists find it exciting to design a child resistant to certain diseases and birth defects, Jeremy Gruber, President of the Council for Responsible Genetics, believes differently: “We need to be extra cautious about any procedure that changes an embryo’s genes...such procedures could cause new and unforeseen genetic abnormalities or accidentally eliminate positive traits.” So by trying to create a perfect baby, you take the risk of permanently damaging the baby’s ability to maintain physical homeostasis. The passage also describes what may happen if we legalize designer babies:  Any mutations, genetic defects, or diseases found in the designed babies can and will be passed down to future generations, creating a dangerous gene pool to reproduce from. You see, by creating one genetically-engineered baby, you are not only affecting one human life, you are possibly threatening the lives of future populations.

To me, “ designing a baby” defeats the purpose of creating an individual.  Many of the pleasures of parenting have to do with watching a child grow, explore the world around them, and eventually develop an identity.  By pre-deciding the genes for a baby, one eliminates some of the qualities that could possibly become essential in a child’s sense of self.  For example, the article states that parents can alter a child’s “...intelligence, height, athletic abilities, musical abilities, and social abilities.” Imagine wondering if the true you is really tall and athletic, or if that is only the genome inserted into you. I would constantly be questioning, second-guessing myself:  was I really smart enough to get an 100 on that test, or is that only due to my scientifically-engineered gene sequence? Not only is choosing a baby’s traits unfair, it also isolates the child from the world around them.  If I were a designer baby I would feel like a project, an inferior being from my normally-produced peers.  While these pre-chosen favorable traits may give a kid a advantage over other children, it may also cause peers to exclude the “laboratory kid” from their play.  Overall, being genetically different has unfavorable effects not only directly on the child, but on how the child perceives the world, and how the world perceives the child.

In conclusion, designing babies in laboratories is not natural, nor does it have many favorable effects on the human race.  At least for now, developing babies with pre-decided genomes is a chancey and risky process that could potentially injure the baby itself, as well as the world around the baby.  Until Designer babies can be guaranteed safe and favorable (which I doubt will ever happen,) I believe the human race should continue to create unique individuals instead of “human” laboratory projects. In summation, in my moral code, designing babies is unethical.

Birds Flying High? Upfront Magazine

Today I read the article "Birds Flying High?" in the most recent issue of Upfront magazine. This article talks about the latest sports scandal revolving around the "sport" of competitive pigeon racing.  In this sport, pigeons are released hundreds of miles from their homes and electronically tracked to observe how fast they are able to make it home.  This sport has caused much controversy in the last month, as it involves gambling and even some doping.  Overall, I find the entire thing disgusting, and I am amazed that almost nothing has been done to stop it.  For one, it is a clear form of animal abuse, and two, by involving animals in our idea of "recreation," we are bringing out the worst in ourselves.

Pigeon racing, in my shared opinion, is a clear and basic example of animal abuse. In fact, it is the epitome of animal abuse.  The article states "...more than 60% of the birds get lost or die because of bad weather, electrical lines, predators, or exhaustion; and those deemed too slow are often killed." This fact merely showcases the extent to which humans are morally able to go, how, somewhat disgustingly, we are able to push other living creatures' health and lives aside just for a good show.  A good laugh. Apparent fun. Another detail in the article read "One pigeon owner told PETA's investigators that the first thing pigeon racers need to know when starting out in the sport is 'how to kill pigeons.' "


On top of this, Pigeon racing brings out the worst in humans. The article indicates, " In October, the world of pigeon racing was rocked when six birds in Belgium tested postive for banned-performing enhancing drugs ( five for a human painkiller, one for cocaine)." Human baseball players, track runners, swimmers, and bicyclers may inject steroids and other performance- enhancing drugs into their bloodstreams, and this is because they have made the decision to do so. It is an entirely different story when bird holders dope helpless animals just to win. "Pigeon racing has recently become a gambling jackpot, with 15 million in gambling at stake each year in the US." People are in no way gambling with money, they are gambling with the lives of hundreds of pigeons, hundreds of living animals.

But recently, there has been attempts to change it. PETA has recently issued a investigation into the nooks and crannies of this horrific sport, and I guarantee there is much to be exposed.  Hopefully, with these shocking facts out in the open, the public will begin to take action and possibly even impeach it from our society.