DiCocco 1

Daniel DiCocco
Professor Miller English 101
September 30, 2015
Designing the Future
Imagine living in a world where you have full control over dictating the outcome of a
child. A couple could create and bring to life any trait that the parents want their baby to possess.
With todays technology, it is not an impossible feat. Genes can be manipulated to select any
traits that any parent would like to design their own baby. This technology could have some
potential in the future with other subjects; however, humanity should not pursue the technology
for creating designer babies and should draw the line before we have this power under full
control because the negative consequences far outweigh the positive advantages.
To begin, genetic modification is changing and manipulating the genes within a human
(or any living organism) to reach a desired trait. An enzyme called a nuclease is used to break the
strand of DNA and removes the defected gene which can be replaced with a more desirable one
(Should We Make Designer Babies?). The technology used to do this is CRISPR-Cas9, or just
CRISPR (Regalado par. 3). So what is a designer baby? A designer baby is a human baby
that undergoes genetic modification to reach a desired trait. Traits can include eye color, hair
color, freckles, skin color, intelligence, or more serious traits such as immunity to cancer and
other diseases and longevity. A couple may want to have this procedure done when having a
child to have their perfect dream baby. With existing technology, it is possible to fill out a
questionnaire and pick anything you want (Design Your Own Baby: Patent Granted). Its not
uncommon for parents to want the best for their child. In fact, any parent would want their
children to be perfect. There are benefits but also some drawbacks to this type of technology.

DiCocco 2
Genetic modification dates back to the agricultural era. Farmers want to have to best
traits for their crops and livestock so their yield will be plentiful (Hagler par. 3). The farmers did
this with heredity. Heredity is the inheritance of genes from the parents to the offspring. The
farmer would select the best livestock to breed and the seeds from the best crops to plant for the
next harvest. Gregor Mendel, an Austrian Augustinian monk, was the first person to track
heredity in pea plants (Hagler par. 4). This is how heredity is almost supposed to work. Nature
decides the outcome of all offspring. In a normal environment, traits will be selected, not forced
upon, and the organism with the best traits to suit the environment will survive. The other
organisms will die and their genes will not be passed on. This is Charles Darwins survival of
the fittest. What Gregor did was study how this heredity process works, and that science was
used to advance genetic technologies.
One of the biggest debates about designer babies and other human genetic modifications
is how ethical it is. Is it ethical? It depends on how a specific culture defines a person. For
example, citizens of China would not think of designer babies as a controversial and ethical
problem because they focus more about advances in science rather than the ethics behind the
scenario (Smith par. 13).
As Dr. Vasantha Muthuswamy, president of the Forum for Ethics Review Committee,
said, "We are not God to design babies. A birth of a child is a natural process, and controlling
nature is unethical." (Jain par. 5). She is correct with her statement. By making designer babies,
we are indirectly taking the role of God by creating life that we want. Nature should dictate the
traits of a child, not technology. Sometimes, a great result wont happen. Changing one part of a
persons DNA could result in another being changed leading to potential birth defects that are
undesired (Should We Make Designer Babies?). Another ethical debate is the extent at which

DiCocco 3
technology is used. Its one thing to cure hereditary diseases before birth, but then that opens up
the door to any trivial traits being modified such as eye or hair color. Where will science draw
the line? Anything about any person can be changed. Is that really fair to give mankind the right
to change how nature is supposed to work? Based on Dr. Vasantha Muthuswamys quote, it is not
right because the way something should be is being altered.
Having the technology for designer babies is also unfair because of the high cost of
having the procedure done. Only the wealthy will be able to afford it since the cost of the
procedure can be about $20,000 in the United States (Regalado par. 30). This major cost will
divide the wealthy from the impoverished greater than it currently is today. The gap between the
two would rise. The wealthy will be able to have the perfect baby to their standards because they
can actually afford it. The difference between two babies, one designer and one non-designer,
will be distinguishable because, of course, the designer baby will have the best traits such as
perfect eyes, high intelligence, musical ability, and immunity to diseases. The other baby would
be the standard baby with normal traits given to them by their two parents. This also ties in with
the ethics argument of the controversy because it isnt fair that one family can have a designer
baby while the other family cant simple because they cant afford it. The wealthy are gifted with
a superior child with perfect eyes, health, and talents as opposed to an inferior offspring that has
normal traits and normal talents as dictated by the genes that the parents passed on to the next
generation. As stated before, the difference between the wealthy and the impoverished will be
more distinguishable and the gap between the two groups will widen and the population would
be more split apart.
Similarities in genes can be a major problem in the human population. Genetic
modification will eventually get to the point where everybody has nearly the same genes. There

DiCocco 4
will be one final ideal for all children. This limits the amount of genes in the gene pool (Thadani
par. 12). A gene pool is the total of all the different possibilities of combinations of genes within
a species, in this case, humans. Since there are minimal genes in the pool, humans will not be as
diverse as we should be. Nature makes everything diverse because the best genes suited for the
environment will be passed down. The other genes die off because they were not best-suited for
the environment. This is why we are all diverse. Glasses, hearing aids, and establishments to take
care of the elderly are already in existence, and it limits the evolution of humans. We have
reached a point where we have nearly stopped evolving (Michio Kaku: Can We Resurrect the
Dinosaurs? Neanderthal Man?). This technology will further hinder our ability to evolve as a
species. What could be the problem of this? One disease could be the demise of most of human
life (Thadani par. 12). If one person is not immune to a disease, the chances are, since everyone
has similar genes, everybody else will die causing a pandemic or even the extinction of the
human race.
There are a few positives of creating a designer baby. A person has the opportunity to
create anything their hearts desire, whether it is for the health of the child, or just for the
aesthetics. After all, who wouldnt want to make the perfect gifted child? A number of different
traits can be selected ranging from eye color to the removal of hereditary diseases such as cancer.
During the process of an embryo scan, any defect can be detected and corrected. Any evidence
that shows the potential for a disease can be seen and the genes can also be removed to stop
diseases such as cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia, and hemophilia (Smith par. 3). Millions of
people have those diseases today in the United States which could be prevented with genetic
modification. Living in a hereditarily disease free world would be like peace on Earth. There will
be no worries about children being killed due to a devastating disease that strikes millions of

DiCocco 5
families unless, of course, there is a pandemic that nobody is immune to because of selecting
specific traits.
In conclusion, humans should not be able to utilize the technology used to create designer
babies. We are indirectly taking the role of God and nature to decide what is best for the future.
Not only is it ethically and economically unfair to pursue, it is very dangerous. When will we
cross the line? Will we ever stop after that line? The only way to find out is by using the
technology, and we shouldnt because we will be living in Aldous Huxleys satirical utopian
society where literally every human is assigned a role in life before birth. Designer babies are not
the future.

DiCocco 6
Works Cited
Design Your Own Baby: Patent Granted YouTube. YouTube, 2 Oct, 2013. Web. 18 Sept. 2015.
Hagler, Gina, MBA. "Designer Baby." Salem Press Encyclopedia (2015): Research Starters.
Web. 19 Sept. 2015.
Jain, Adarsh. "Making Designer Babies Unethical, Expert Says Coimbatore]." The Times of
India (Online)Dec 17 2014. ProQuest. Web. 19 Sept. 2015.
Michio Kaku: Can We Resurrect the Dinosaurs? Neanderthal Man? YouTube. YouTube, 20
Sept, 2012. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.
Regalado, Antonio. "Engineering The Perfect Baby. (Cover Story)." MIT Technology Review
(2015): 26. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 19 Sept. 2015.
Should We Make Designer Babies? YouTube. YouTube, 24 Mar, 2015. Web. 18 Sept. 2015.
Smith, Patricia. "Designer babies." New York Times Upfront 2014: 6. Academic OneFile. Web.
18 Sept. 2015.
Thadani, Rahul. "The Public Should Oppose Designer Baby Technology." Designer Babies. Ed.
Clayton Farris Naff. Detroit: Greenhaven, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. of "Designer Babies
Debate." Http://www.buzzle.com. N.p.: n.p., 2011. N. pag. Opposing Viewpoints in
Context. Web. 30 Sept. 2015.