Essay代写：People Should Treat Genetic Technologies Seriously－r51due

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- People Should Treat Genetic Technologies Seriously，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了基因技术。在当今社会的应用中，转基因作物在全球绝大多数国家都有应用，特别是在具有显著产出和强大抗灾能力优势的发展中国家。尽管人们担心转基因作物的安全性，在欧洲国家甚至禁止转基因作物，但大多数人仍坚持的情况下，转基因作物还是一直都在发展着。对待转基因技术，人们一定要认真起来。

Ever since biologists figured out the structure of DNA and published the great discovery in 1953, they had been feverishly believed in the new era of another great revolution, which would benefit people in all extends by genetic manipulation and play a significant role in the history of human progress. And when it comes to its applications in today’s society, genetically modified crops are applied in a great majority of countries in the global area, especially in developing countries with advantages of remarkable output and powerful calamity resistance. Most people maintain an attitude of continuous observation for the genetically modified crops under the current circumstance of reducing hunger by boosting food output, even though people are concerned about genetically modified crops onits safety and even banned them in European countries. It is comprehensible to see the debate over genetic engineering becomes more and more fierce as few of scientists are interested in using genetic techniques on human beings by modifying the genomes of human beings at the embryonic stage in order to reach the goal of “good birth”. Moreover, CRISPR-Cas9, a genome editing tool, has become one of most popular genetic techniques for designer baby of today. It consists of two parts, one of which two parts is an enzyme called Cas9 – just like ascissors that can cut the two strands of DNA so that sections of the DNA sequence can be added or removed; another part turns out to be a piece of RNA called guide RNA, which helps binding DNA and guiding Cas9 to the right part of the genome to make sure Case9 cuts at the right point.

People who have a great desire for designer babies believe CRISPR-Cas9 can certify and snip out the natural mistakes by removing the genetically transmissible human diseases and improve human bodies with special needs, such as height, weight, or gender according to their parents’ decision. Nevertheless, I have to take issue with the people who endorse designer babies without a second thought and there are reasons to explain. First of all, due to the lack of oversight system, the genetic techniques tend to be used for individual cases or reaching personal, rather than therapeutic goals, and its safety and acceptability are underdetermined. Secondly, the manipulation of children’s characteristics violates human rights. This is more of an ethnic problems than a technical problem. Last but not the least, the reproductive technologies may cause the campaign of the eugenics movement. Considering the danger and risk that may occur in the progress, I would say that the application of genetic techniques on human beings should be forbidden as it creates possibilities of a path to a future with biological dystopia.

Since people are able to use these techniques for personal goals without oversight, which may intentionally causes social chaos, oversight systems are very necessary in the development of genetic techniques. Some people argue that the purpose of development of genetic techniques is to fight against diseases by directly removing disease-causing genes in human embryos. So that the establishment of oversight system may not be important because the application of genetic techniques on human beings will not cause any negative impact. However, without the oversight of some supervision mechanism the development of genetic techniques may go into stray from therapeutic purposes into creating human beings with parental interests. This could be a sad portrait of the future designer baby without supervision, genetic techniques are more inclined to become a tool for profiteers to make money and parents to design babies instead of saving babies that should be born with diseases.

Moreover, the lack of oversight system would also have some other chain reactions that would lead to chaos. Mark S. Frankel and Audrey R. Chapman, who work in the American Association for the Advancement of Science, have discussed in the article that the inheritable genetic modification techniques should not go any further until it is analyzed under the oversight with the scientific and ethical review in both public and private sectors level, determining the short- and long-term risks of inadvertent effects on the germ line and responding for the acceptability of inheritable genetic modification research and applications (1303). This article demonstrates that the establishment of oversight system is significant, and that the safety and acceptability of genetic techniques should be determined under oversight before applying to human beings. Arguably, the application of genetic techniques on human beings should be forbidden because there is no evidence disproving the possibility of risks, whether intended or inadvertent, owing to the lack of oversight system.

Whether the parents are considered legal to make decisions for their children on their characteristics remains controversial, and there are no clear definition for the law for embryos, which would also make the situation for designer babies even unstable. Even though some parents who wish to have designer babies believe that the manipulation of children’s characteristics does not violate human rights with an explanation that they have the right to make decisions that would affect the future paths of their own offspring according to the parental autonomy, such parental right remains vague in current jurisprudence due to the consideration of whether embryo should be viewed as a full person. Thus, since the classification and definition of embryo have not been determined by law, the right of parents to manipulate their children’s characteristics is inaccurate and able to be challenged when people view embryo as a human being.

Furthermore, even if the manipulation of children’s characteristics is not considered to be violating human rights, it deprives children’s right to the open future. Robert J L Darby has explained this point in his article, applying the principle of open future and the principle of “rights in trust” to the case of designer babies, a right that children cannot yet exercise until they reach maturity, and discussed that parents should not use genetic manipulation to create physically abnormal children, foreclosing the future options of their children, but leave them the greatest possible scope for exercising personal life choice in adulthood(463). The article shows that the manipulation of children’s characteristics violates children’s rights to the open future. Therefore, parents should stop to use genetic manipulation to create babies with some desired ventures and characteristics as it denies autonomy and choice of the future children, violating human rights.

The artificial breeding among human being isn't new for people, and history has proven that there is no advantage in introducing such concept into human descending. In the twentieth century, the eugenics movement was described as a dark era when human rights are neglected and serious racial discrimination occurs. After Francis Galton, who was a scientist on medicine and mathematics, discovered the discipline that the offspring of elites are the same eminent as their parents in a high incidence and concluded that personality traits, such as character, talent, and interest, are hereditary, he presented the idea of the eugenics in order to improve human beings by influencing heredity through procreative decisions. Galton’s theory was embraced by scientific community and supported by governments. During the eugenics movement of the United States, human races who are diagnosed to have poor genes are identified as feebleminded people, and government had legal authority to restrict the marriage of the feebleminded, reducing the offspring who are genetically inferior. The history has proven that the eugenics movement would bring the society nothing but chaos and discrimination. The designer babies with artificial multiplied characteristics is the same with eugenics movements, and it should not be happening to human society a second time.

The application of genetic modification on human beings has continued the concept brought by the eugenics movements. While most people believe that the eugenics movement has ended after World War II, eugenics still exists in the form of genetic modification on human beings in current society. Some scientists and politicians made attempts to deny the emergence of eugenics and stated that the genetic modification on human embryos is an individual cases but not coerced by government. However, modern eugenics exists in a different ideology from traditional eugenics but with the same purpose, creating the “good birth” concept. The eugenics in the past tended to affect reproduction by selecting parents. The eugenics of today tends to affect reproduction by selecting children. Sonia M. Suter, who is a law professor in the University of California, Berkeley, identifies the classic eugenics and applies the concept of eugenics to reproductive technologies in the article, and argues that reproductive technologies are a form of new eugenics today, and they will put us in a hard situation if people focus on having discriminatory attitudes, improving human species by reproductive choices of each parent, instead of fighting against diseases in the form of genetic therapy. The article demonstrates that reproductive technologies, such as modern eugenics today, are not objectionable since the underlying goal is to treat heritable diseases, but they are harmful due to the attitudes of the people who focus on the heritability of traits with the goal of “good birth”, improving human beings. Accordingly, the application of genetic modification on human beings will cause the modern eugenics movement because it presents eugenics by reproductive choices and holds the same goal as the traditional eugenics.

As a conclusion, though genetic techniques such as genetically modified crops truly benefit people, we should treat them with serious attitude, especially when it is applied on human beings. From my perspective, I do not want to object the reproductive technologies per se because the ultimate goal of these technologies is to eliminate inheritable genetic diseases and cure human diseases, which is quite an ambition, and many people would be saved using those technologies if they can cure genetic diseases and prove there are no risks. However, the ultimate goal tends to become genetic enhancement of human beings from genetic treatment of human diseases. People are more concern about the heritability of traits, determining the characteristics of their future children as they want. Thus, I argue that the application of genetic modification on human beings should be forbidden because the heritability of traits violates the children’s rights to an open future and will causes the modern eugenics movement. Furthermore, since there is no oversight system, it is hard to regulate the industry of reproductive technologies, and there is no evidence showing the technology is secure enough to apply on human beings. Therefore, I argue that people should treat genetic technologies seriously.

Work Cited

Darby, Robert J L. “The Child's Right to an Open Future: Is the Principle Applicable to Non- Therapeutic Circumcision?” Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 39, no. 7, 2013, pp. 463– 468. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43282787.

Frankel, Mark S., and Audrey R. Chapman. “Facing Inheritable Genetic Modifications.” Science, vol. 292, no. 5520, 2001, pp. 1303–1303. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3083749.

Suter, Sonia M. “A Brave New World of Designer Babies?” Berkeley Technology Law Journal, vol. 22, no. 2, 2007, pp. 897–969. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/24117430.

想要了解更多英国留学资讯或者需要英国代写，请关注51Due英国论文代写平台，51Due是一家专业的论文代写机构，专业辅导海外留学生的英文论文写作，主要业务有essay代写、paper代写、assignment代写。在这里，51Due致力于为留学生朋友提供高效优质的留学教育辅导服务，为广大留学生提升写作水平，帮助他们达成学业目标。如果您有essay代写需求，可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。