Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Some) people will design the new human for the benefit of themselves (i.e. the designer) rather than the benefit of the new human. A few ideas that come to mind are having children with ridiculously amped loyalty, so I can condition them during their early years and then put them to work making money and simply use them as my retirement fund. I could also ensure they're suitable organ donors, and make use of their o…
There's already a demographic that'd do that sort of thing - see reddit.com/r/raisedbynarcissists for horrifying examples. Your concern is dead on, and we'd need some serious progress on youth rights for me to be more comfortable with unrestricted designer babies.
First 'three person baby' born using new method
41–50 of 189 posts
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's already a demographic that'd do that sort of thing - see reddit.com/r/raisedbynarcissists for horrifying examples. Your concern is dead on, and we'd need some serious progress on youth rights for me to be more comfortable with unrestricted designer babies.
Interestingly, I think the current systems in most of the developed would would already handle this somewhat adequately, insofar as "designer babies" would probably not be treated as genetic children of their "gene base" parents (i.e. something they have an intrinsic right to take home from the hospital), but probably rather would be considered "genetic orphans" (like babies dropped off at a hospital with no known pa…
What if the design starts with the parents' DNA, but makes one change to prevent a disease? Seems like that parent wouldn't be adopting a genetic orphan, and would have the right to take the newborn home. What about two changes? 50? It's one of those "where do we draw the line?" issues.
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#43Notably, this prevents transmission of a disease that is "fatal to any baby conceived", which makes this as uncontroversial a case of a "designer baby" as I can imagine. After this, the ethics get much more complicated.
It occurs to me: What are the ethical problems with designer babies?
The poor can't afford this, so fall further and further behind, perhaps eventually humanity splits into subspecies.
This is very well trod ground. See The time machine by H G Wells with the Morlocs and Eloi, A Brave New World by Aldous Huxley with the Alphas and Betas, etc, etc...
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#44Notably, this prevents transmission of a disease that is "fatal to any baby conceived", which makes this as uncontroversial a case of a "designer baby" as I can imagine. After this, the ethics get much more complicated.
It occurs to me: What are the ethical problems with designer babies?
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly, I think the current systems in most of the developed would would already handle this somewhat adequately, insofar as "designer babies" would probably not be treated as genetic children of their "gene base" parents (i.e. something they have an intrinsic right to take home from the hospital), but probably rather would be considered "genetic orphans" (like babies dropped off at a hospital with no known pa…
Maybe, but that seems to assume effectively no genetic material from the parents. What if the design starts with the parents' DNA, but makes one change to prevent a disease? Seems like that parent wouldn't be adopting a genetic orphan, and would have the right to take the newborn home. What about two changes? 50? It's one of those "where do we draw the line?" issues.
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
It occurs to me: What are the ethical problems with designer babies?
In a world with "designer babies", the rich don't just get richer, they get smarter, stronger, more attractive and start to live longer. The poor can't afford this, so fall further and further behind, perhaps eventually humanity splits into subspecies. This is very well trod ground. See The time machine by H G Wells with the Morlocs and Eloi, A Brave New World by Aldous Huxley with the Alphas and Betas, etc, etc...
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, no quandary at all created by the possibility that mistakes and misunderstandings might lead to children with severe medical problems. Short, miserable lifetimes of suffering are a high cost for "improving the species", and they are a real possibility if the approach taken is to just try things that seem worth trying.
Similar risks are taken when two native people from different parts of the world have a baby together.
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a world with "designer babies", the rich don't just get richer, they get smarter, stronger, more attractive and start to live longer. The poor can't afford this, so fall further and further behind, perhaps eventually humanity splits into subspecies. This is very well trod ground. See The time machine by H G Wells with the Morlocs and Eloi, A Brave New World by Aldous Huxley with the Alphas and Betas, etc, etc...
Or you use state sponsored designs and everyone has access to it.
Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#49Re: First 'three person baby' born using new method
#50And polygamy is stil illegal. I can father a child with my two girlfriends but cannot marry them both. Bah!