Gigliotti 1

Kyley Gigliotti

Professor Johnson-Taylor

ENG 1201

09 July 2020

How will allowing the genetic modification of human embryos affect future bioethical

guidelines?

Firstly, what are genes? Genes are the basic function used for heredity. They are made up

of DNA which acts as a recipe for a particular organism. No person has control over what their

genes consist of. All of that is based on your parents, and their parents, and their parents before

them. But in November of 2018, a Chinese researcher changed that. He Jiankui announced he

had altered the genes of two human embryos to make them resistant to HIV. HIV can lead to a

life-threatening disease called AIDS which these babies can now avoid.

Mr. Jiankui used the technology of the method of CRISPR. CRISPR allows for “genetic

material [to be] edited quickly and cheaply” (“We Have the Technology to Customize Our

Babies”). Ultimately, this amazing technology has the ability to be used to deteriorate the effects

of many different diseases. But there is the extreme possibility it can be taken too far.

This has brought about the idea of so-called “designer babies”. A designer baby is “a

baby genetically engineered in vitro for specially selected traits…” (“Ethics of Designer Babies”)

(Sarah Ly). But these traits aren’t just ones that reduce the risk of diseases. These include traits

regarding gender, eye color, and possibly intelligence. Parents of the future may have the ability
 Gigliotti 2

to design the lifestyle of their child before they are born. Years ago these were ideas only heard

about in movies but now the idea of “playing god” doesn’t seem so far-fetched.

But who should have the authority to regulate all this technology? This type of editing

has the power to affect all mankind for centuries to come. Meaning that regulation must be

long-term and effective. Some believe that technology would be easiest to regulate by nation.

Others disagree, saying that this is an international issue and must be regulated by a high power.

Currently, “The U.S. National Academies and the British Royal Society have launched an

international commission. The World Health Organization has created an advisory committee,

also.” in regards to gene editing (“We Have the Technology to Customize Our Babies”). This

issue seems to be leaning towards an international affair with a central source for regulation.

Who's to say this will work for all future technological issues but scientists say this approach has

some promise for now.

 Gigliotti 3

Works Cited

“The Embryo Project Encyclopedia.” ​Ethics of Designer Babies | The Embryo Project

Encyclopedia​, 31 Mar. 2011, embryo.asu.edu/pages/ethics-designer-babies. Accessed 9

July 2020.

Grise, Chrisanne. "Designer Babies." New York Times Upfront, vol. 151, no. 13, 13 May 2019,

p. 6+. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

https://link-gale-com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/A587973822/OVIC?u=dayt30401&si

d=OVIC&xid=0af5fb98. Accessed 9 July 2020.

Long, Heather. "Selecting a Child's Genetic Traits Will Create a Privileged Elite." Human

Genetics, edited by Louise I. Gerdes, Greenhaven Press, 2014. Opposing Viewpoints.

Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

https://link-gale-com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/EJ3010916210/OVIC?u=dayt30401&

sid=OVIC&xid=c12639f9. Accessed 9 July 2020.

Malik, Kenan. "Fear of dystopian change should not blind us to the potential of gene editing."

Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2020. Gale In Context: Opposing

Viewpoints,

https://link-gale-com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/DXCSKE566599351/OVIC?u=dayt30

401&sid=OVIC&xid=7b15e0e5. Accessed 9 July 2020.

 Gigliotti 4

"We have the technology to customize our babies. It needs regulation." Washingtonpost.com, 21

May 2019. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,

https://link-gale-com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/A586215012/OVIC?u=dayt30401&si

d=OVIC&xid=ea49f747. Accessed 9 July 2020.