Genetic Engineering

Genetic engineering is defined as the deliberate modification of genes in order to alter characteristics of an organism A designer baby is a baby whos genetic makeup has been selected to ensure the presence or absence of particular genes or characteristics A stem cell is a master cell that can grow into any type of cell in the body, there are 2 types, totipotent and multipotent Totipotent cells have unlimited capability to turn into any cell in the body, they are found in the embryonic stage of the cell, you cannot extract them without destroying the embryo Multipotent cells have less capability for differentiation, their role is to replace damaged tissues and can be removed from embryos and adults without killing them There are 2 main risks associated with using stem cells for research and as medication, firstly, extracting totipotent cells kills the embryo and secondly, reprogramming multipotent cells can cause unintended problems, they may become tumours Another problem arises with compatibility and the chance of rejection, embryonic stem cells may be rejected by the patients body which may cause problems A solution to this problem would be producing an embryonic clone of the person and using those stem cells for therapeutic reasons, this is known as therapeutic cloning, and reduces the chance of rejection

Human cloning is illegal in the UK, due to its unknown and unsafe status, since abnormalities in the foetus may be produced, cloning may, in the future, propose a solution for infertile couples Plants may also be genetically modified, these are known as GM crops, food that has been genetically modified may taste better or have improved resistance to pests and the damage caused by pesticides They can also be used to increase yield and offer the best solution to end or at least reduce world hunger and malnutrition However there are some problems that arise when using GM crops, they may have unintended disastrous effects on the environment and may cause problems with crosspollination GM crops may have side-effects on humans which are unknown as of yet, and they may not completely solve the problem of world hunger, only social and economic equality and justice will solve this problem completely This relates to another problem brought up by Genetic Engineering, most companies dont really care about the ethics but rather about the money made, they may see a potential to make huge amounts of money by patenting the seeds so the farms have to pay huge

amounts of money to use them, reducing the extent of their effect, especially in less economically developed countries where there is much less money Companies can also design the seed in a specific way where only they can produce the products required to use the seed, this is another opportunity to make money

In the case of designer babies, embryos are selected, which are then screened for genetically inherited diseases and perhaps other defects, if the embryo is clear then it is used in the implantation of the womb Genetic testing is where doctors can test for the presence of certain genes that are thought to produce diseases such as breast cancer, however an ethical problem arises when concerning whether or not the results should remain private or be divulged to insurance companies/employers However this is subject to normal medical testing which is subject to laboratory error which could lead to the termination of a foetus

There are 2 different types of Gene therapy; somatic and germ line engineering, in somatic engineering, your genes are changed to cure an otherwise fatal disease, the changes do not pass down towards the offspring, however ethical issues arise when carrying this out on foetuses, making life-changing decisions without their consent or knowledge, concerns are also brought up when discussing the possibility that this may lead to a society where the rich can afford genetic enhancement and the poor cannot The second type, known as Germ line engineering, involves changing the DNA of the gametes cell, these changes are passed on down to future generations, this also raises ethical dilemmas as it has the potential to change the whole of the Human races future, we effectively take charge of our own evolution

Arguments against Genetic manipulation

Safety argument - It is too dangerous, we simply dont know enough about the possible sideeffects at this point in time Slippery slope argument May lead to possible abuses in the system, could lead to a possible system of eugenics Respect for autonomy argument Violates the rights and autonomy of the child since decisions are made that directly affect them without their knowledge/consent The hubris argument We are playing God which goes against many Christian fundamental values and principles The giftedness argument We should just try to accept the gift of life rather than trying to change it, humans are control freaks and we should leave the control of life up to natural forces

Religious theists who take the strong sanctity of life argument are strongly against any sort of embryonic research as it always leads to the destruction of the embryo, they are also against designer babies as we should leave the design part of things to God, we should not play God Theologian Ramsey argues that increased uses of genetic engineering only proves technologies dominance over human beings, it undermines the core human principles of love and respect, he argues we may create a number of mistakes which can never be morally justified Strong sanctity of life followers also believe that once genetic engineering is accepted in society, this will lead to a slippery slope which could eventually lead to a system of eugenics However some theists and situation ethics followers take a weak sanctity of life approach, they may support embryonic research in some cases if it is acting in the best interests of society, if the research promotes the best interests of society then it should be done, they dont agree with the slippery slope argument The metaphysical or religious belief that foetuses are persons is a perfectly legitimate act of faith, but there is no way to prove it or show it Joseph Fletcher Weak sanctity of life followers would welcome genetic engineering if it promoted love (agape for SE followers) and led to the eradication of diseases or world poverty, they also follow along the line of humans being stewards of the earth and that God put us in charge and gave us intelligence so we would grow, we must use this intelligence to take charge of what was given to us Other religious people argue that parents who abort a child due a serious genetic defect are more responsible than those who keep the child and then cause more pain and suffering by divorcing later on through the marriage because of an inability to cope with the child

Natural Moral law theorists are mostly against genetic engineering, they regard it as extremely unnatural and therefor morally wrong, however this can also be used against them as operations that significantly prolong the life of the patients are also extremely unnatural so why are they ok? Embryo research is also regarded as wrong because in the majority of cases, the embryo is killed which goes against the primary precepts, however the law of double effect can be applied here, the benefit gained by humanity is the primary intention and the death of the embryo a simple unintended, secondary consequence This is the reason why stem cells extracted from adults and the umbilical cord of a child is allowed by NML followers Designer babies are also wrong because they involve killing the spare embryos that were not implanted in the womb

Genetic enhancement for cosmetic reasons is also wrong because it is selfish, but genetic enhancement that could stop a person from becoming autistic could be regarded as morally acceptable Pope John Paul II said With all kinds of genetic manipulation, we may cure one imperfection and create a thousand more. Science should know its limits and not play God Germ-line therapy is also regarded as wrong because of the risks involved and the unintended effects on the human race; We do not have the same responsibilities for future generations as we do for ourselves and for our children Helen Watt

A follower of Kantian ethics would argue from both sides of the story, if the follower took into account the universalizability idea, they would come to the conclusion that they would not like to be experimented on as an embryo and then killed, and so it is not right to wish this upon other embryos, also backed up by a Kingdom of Ends, which says we should treat people as ends and not use them as a means, by using an embryo for research we are using them as a means However a problem arises when regarding the last formulation of the imperative, saying that you must act like you are a lawmaker in a kingdom of ends, we must take into account the human race when making our laws, and the follower may come to the conclusion that it will better the human race and so therefore is allowed, this is also backed up by the point that embryos are definitely not rational beings, and so cannot be considered when deciding the morality of an action

Utilitarianists are mostly positive about all forms of genetic engineering as in most cases, they cause more pleasure than pain, however the long-term consequences of altering genes is unknown so this is still a grey area They are also ok with embryonic research and killing embryos for stem cells because they believe in the quality of life argument, and so do not think that life holds any absolute, divine value