Pre-natal testing for desirable babies

I think so baby, they don't like adopt serious abused to because cause addiction drug because wrong abused risk dangerous avoid because AAA (adopters aginast adoption)

social worker take punishment to investigate to parents fault screw up on baby!
 
I don't know which I find more objectionable from an ethical position: genetic manipulation to create the characteristics the parent desires, or attempting to change that child's characteristics by forcing them into a mold resembling what the parent wants, eg the deaf child made to resemble a hearing child, a child who demonstrates other gender characteristics subjected to counseling and interventions in an attempt to prevent homosexual behaviors, an intersexed child forced to live as a gender they are not comfortable with, etc.
 
jillio said:
I don't know which I find more objectionable from an ethical position: genetic manipulation to create the characteristics the parent desires, or attempting to change that child's characteristics by forcing them into a mold resembling what the parent wants.
Click to expand...

Or the maintenance work done to keep them that way.
 
StSapphire said:
That's how my girlfriend and I were (not even really wanting any right now, but considering it as a future possibility), and at least when she first brought it up, I had the exact same reaction. And I equally have no clue why.
Click to expand...

There have been studies that indicate that there is a gender difference at play here. Not only do men feel the strong need to have a child from their own genetic background or none at all, they also have more difficulty accepting a child with any form of birth defect or disability. Has to do with the way men are socialized to unconsciously equate their masculinity with the ability to produce children similar in characteristics, and that producing a child with any form of birth defect or disability is a negative statement on their masculinity.
 
Beach girl said:
Shel90, I thought you were in favor of allowing women to have abortions, no questions asked, it's the woman's individual decision, no one else's right to make moral judgments about her, etc., etc.

So if a woman decides she doesn't want to have the particular baby she is pregnant with, because it has Down's syndrome, is deaf, has a physical deformity of some kind - isn't it making a moral judgment to say she shouldn't "choose" not to have that baby?

I read recently that there are many fewer babies with Down's being born these days, because most are now aborted if the test comes back positive for that.
Click to expand...

kokonut said:
I see it as a double standard, hypocrisy even, when it comes to abortion in this instance such as "My body, my choice!" But to do a 180 when it comes to accepting or rejecting an embryo on the basis of what they're looking for as being "wrong," even "unethical" which is a hoot because it's still abortion, doesn't exactly pass the smell test.
Click to expand...

so what you're saying is this....

"hey - it's my baby. my choice. I know the best. I'm going to make my 10 years old daughter looks like a prada queen because she will become Miss Universe. I'm going to get her breast implant, botox shot, piercing, and nose job."

that's exactly what you support.

again kokonut - this is incredibly shameless of you to even use this kind of subject to relate it to deaf issue.
 
Last edited:
If a boyfriend wasn't open to adoption that was a deal breaker for me. Discussed it with my husband before we married.

To me, there's a difference between screening for serious medical issues and screening for other reasons. Personally, I don't like sex selection except in the case of X-linked genetic problems.
 
sallylou said:
If a boyfriend wasn't open to adoption that was a deal breaker for me. Discussed it with my husband before we married.

To me, there's a difference between screening for serious medical issues and screening for other reasons. Personally, I don't like sex selection except in the case of X-linked genetic problems.
Click to expand...

Nor do I. Practically speaking, how would you implement that in law? Or would you?

In a book I read recently about adoption ("Baby, We Were Meant for Each Other") the author said that Asia is missing 90 million girl babies that you would expect should have been born, but who have been aborted due mainly to China's one-child policy. 90 million. The mind boggles.
 
Jiro said:
so what you're saying is this....

"hey - it's my baby. my choice. I know the best. I'm going to make my 10 years old daughter looks like a prada queen because she will become Miss Universe. I'm going to get her breast implant, botox shot, piercing, and nose job."

that's exactly what you support.

again kokonut - this is incredibly shameless of you to even use this kind of subject to relate it to deaf issue.
Click to expand...

10 year old "Prada queens" have absolutely zero to do with anything we have been talking about. Much less anything either kokonut or I would support.

I think I'm safe in speaking for kokonut in that way.
 
sallylou said:
If a boyfriend wasn't open to adoption that was a deal breaker for me. Discussed it with my husband before we married.

To me, there's a difference between screening for serious medical issues and screening for other reasons. Personally, I don't like sex selection except in the case of X-linked genetic problems.
Click to expand...

Does that mean you would kill all girls?
 
Beach girl said:
10 year old "Prada queens" have absolutely zero to do with anything we have been talking about. Much less anything either kokonut or I would support.

I think I'm safe in speaking for kokonut in that way.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is very much on topic as the discussion is in regard to designer babies, who then will become designer children. And those that are raising the 10 year old Prada children are of the same mindset as those who would use genetic engineering to create the perfect child that can be used as some sort of vicarious expression of the parents' unfulfilled needs.
 
Both China and India have a surplus of boys and will suffer social issues from the imbalance of gender.

In the US, preventing medical professionals from using sex selection would be enough. I don't know what can be done in China and India. I read that women with ultrasound machines offer their services in Indian villages for a relatively small fee. The sex selection is occuring outside the medical care setting.
 
So then are you against IVF and similar manipulations in order to create children? To "design" children, as it were?

(That was to jillio.)
 
Bottesini said:
Does that mean you would kill all girls?
Click to expand...

Well, sex selection doesn't necessarily involve abortion in any form. There are techniques used for sex selection that are non-invasive. One can even time intercourse to increase the chances of conceiving one sex or another. But the most often used technique is sperm separation.
 
Many X-linked defects are more severe in boys. Fragile X syndrome comes to mind.
 
jillio said:
Well, sex selection doesn't necessarily involve abortion in any form. There are techniques used for sex selection that are non-invasive. One can even time intercourse to increase the chances of conceiving one sex or another. But the most often used technique is sperm separation.
Click to expand...

That is what it means though?
 
Beach girl said:
So then are you against IVF and similar manipulations in order to create children? To "design" children, as it were?

(That was to jillio.)
Click to expand...

IVF does not include gene manipulation and is not used to increase the probability of certain characteristics in the offspring. It is not used to create "designer children". IVF and the manipulation used to create children that comply with parental desires for specific characteristics are two very different subjects.
 
I think that Bott is thinking of X-linked dominant inheritence. In that case, fathers cannot pass the mutation to their sons. Mothers with the mutation have a 50% of affected offspring of both genders. There's also X-linked recessive inheritence.
 
Back
Top