Category: Genetic Engineering

Introduction

The subject of genetic engineering has captured our imaginations since the first strains of hybrid wheat and vegetables were commercialized. Genetic engineering is the science of altering the genes so that the offspring that is produced show a different and better physical structure and even mental ability. While it was acceptable to use genetic engineering to increase food supply by growing better and healthier crops, science has received increased criticism when parents attempt to engineer the genes of the to-be-born babies so that the babies have better looks. This paper examines the literature about different types and use of genetic engineering and offers a criticism about these methods.

Somatic gene therapy

McKibben (2003) speaks of Somatic Gene Therapy as it is used to modify the gene and cell structure of human beings so that the cells are able to produce certain chemicals that would help the body to fight diseases and germs. The author has given two examples that demonstrate the use and effects of this therapy. In one case, the author comments about an old lady who is suffering from cystic fibrosis. Scientists would attempt to modify her genes by putting the genes in some viruses that are injected into the patient. The virus would hopefully infect the cells and make them produce the required chemicals that would fight the ailment. In effect, scientists are modifying the genes in the patient’s body, and this is genetic engineering (para 10).

McKibben (2003) has given another example of how genetic engineering has been used for increasing the cosmetic beauty of people. People who worry about aging lines and furrows on the face take a mild injection of Botox so that the cells in the face are genetically modified and do not fall into furrows. The author points out that Botox is actually a deadly poison, and if used in large quantities, it can kill people, and it is like smearing the plague spores on the feet to kill the germs on the feet that cause athlete’s feet. This is a foolish pastime that socialites, movie stars, and others who like by their looks frequently use, with untold risk to their bodies. Not only has the Botox dose to be taken after every few months, but also the drug causes paralysis of the face muscle so that one cannot show expressions of anger or happiness. However, some section of people is happy to take these injections and do not mind paying the price. According to the author, Botox injections are easily available and frequently used.

Germline genetic engineering

McKibben (2003, para 10) has pointed out the Germline genetic engineering refers to the genetic engineering done on the fertilized embryo that may be a week old; scientists would take apart the cells of the embryo, select one of the cells and either delete or modify some of the genes, insert artificial chromosomes that would have pre-designed genes. The cells would then be placed in an egg from which the nucleus has been removed and the embryo implant inside the womb of a woman. After the customary nine months or so, the woman would give birth to a genetically engineered baby. Depending on the choices and selection made by the parent, the child could be an excellent sportsman, have the intelligence of Einstein and the looks of Tom Cruise.

McKibben (Para 11) points out that such a method, when it becomes commercialized, removes the whole concept of conceiving, giving birth, and the resulting baby would be the subject of product development and technology. It would be possible in the future to alter the DNA sequence just like we edit documents on the computer and print out the required number of copies of babies. This is indeed a scary thought, and the question of ethics comes into the picture, mainly is it right for parents to decide the choice for the unborn children and decide who they will be, what they will do, and in what field they would excel. It is not a question of ’If this process is available commercially but rather ‘When’ it would be commercialized.

McKibben (Para 21) points out that parents are always subtly forcing their thoughts and wants on children right from when they are babies. The author reports that he took out his baby daughter to the forest and the wild outdoors so that the baby could learn what the wild meant, right from an early age, and this was basically because the father wanted his child to be like the outdoor life. Again the author speaks of how fathers begin teaching their children how to pitch even when the child is four years old.

Parents spare no effort in getting their child the right education and training so that the children have some initial training and advantage that will help the child to come up in life. So what is the harm if the parent decides to use genetic engineering to increase the intelligence of the child or make it much more physically fit so that the child can join Ivy league colleges or be a leading sportsman (para 22).

So relating this argument with genetic engineering, the author points out that the advantage of genetically modified babies would be lost when the process becomes commercialized. All children would have an IQ of 150, so getting into Stanford would be as difficult as it was before. All children could pitch fast, curve the ball and attempt to strike out opponents, so the advantage of a genetically engineered baby would be lost (para 23).

Salleh (8 May 2001) had written that a huge uproar had been raised when it was found that genetically modified babies’ research has advanced and that field trials have been taken. Lane (2008) has pointed out that scientists in the US have already produced a baby with three parents, and when the Food and Drug Administration got new about this venture, they closed down the unit and banned research. The research had been taken up to help a woman who was suffering from infertility.

Conclusion

Genetic engineering and genetically modified humans, as presented by the author, appear just as a research project for developing a new ‘hybrid car’ that promises to give 500 miles to the gallon. The process is actually tinkering with life and nature and the diversity that god and nature have created to make the human race. Human life cannot be turned into an assembly line of products, and where the first child would be X version and have certain product features, the second child is X+ version and have much more enhanced abilities. So what happens to the first child, and what happens to the child who has been born of a natural process of conceiving. These questions cannot be answered by science since these are quantitative and psychological concepts, and genetic engineering has no place for these concepts. According to my, the process of producing genetically modified humans should be banned.

“If there is a mystery at the heart of human condition, it is otherness: the otherness of man and woman, parent and child. It is the space we make for otherness that makes love something other than narcissism.” (para, 35)

References

McKibben Bill. 2003. Designer Genes. 2008. Web.

Lane Nick. 2008. Genetically modified humans: Here and more coming soon. NewScientist Magazine. Issue 2659.

Salleh Anna. 2001. Genetically modified human babies? 2008. Web.

Genetic engineering is one of the most debatable problems in the modern world. The process of manipulating genes has brought scientists to important discoveries, among which is the technology of the production of new kinds of crops and plants with selected characteristics. Genetic modification also allowed the introduction of new ways of human disease treatment and prevention. However, along with many considerable advantages, specific scientific and ethical questions have arisen, calling into question whether the world is ready for genetic engineering.

This problem is one of the essential themes of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, where biotechnology is the tool for creating flawless individuals as bricks of an ideal society in a perfect new world. In the context of a novel, genetic engineering receives negative evaluation. In this essay, with references to the current discussion among scientists as well as Huxley’s novel, it will be argued that the application of genetic technologies may be beneficial as well as damaging.

The problem of the advantages and disadvantages of genetic engineering is one of the acutest problems in scientific discussion. The attention particularly turned to this question in the light of a dispute in 2018 after the method of genetic modification was first time applied to human embryos. The technology allowed the birth of twins free from HIV, while their father was infected (Rose and Brown 157). The majority of opinions were against the application of the new technology for altering the human body; many arguments were of ethical concern.

However, the question of implementing the new genetic technologies remains ambiguous. It provides help in dealing with health issues and improving agricultural products, and in the future may open the horizons for new possibilities (Zhang et al. 119). Moreover, clinic use of genetic technologies allows to improve the treatment of many health problems; the example of it is supplying diabetes patients with genetically modified insulin.

In the context of this discussion, “Brave New World continues to be the most frequently referenced work of fiction in the genome-editing discourse” (So 216). The novel describes the world seven centuries after the twentieth century, where the World State’s motto is “Community, Identity, Stability” (Huxley 1). The children are not delivered in a usual way but produced in laboratories using various techniques, and later segregated into five castes of different levels, from the top Alpha to the bottom Epsilon.

Thus, everybody is determined to play a particular role in the social system. “What man has joined, nature is powerless to put asunder” (Huxley 21); such a declaration of human power over nature is the new belief of the world where religion and art are eradicated. Society is assumed to be happy, however, instead of utopic “brave new world,” Huxley’s novel appears to be its straight dystopic opposite. It presents the drama of humans who are not able to fit into the distilled “ideal” environment. Genetic engineering, thus, comes to be a part of this negative picture and manifests, instead of progress, one of the most significant human misconceptions.

However, it seems that Brave New World is “often misrepresented as being about the direct genetic engineering of humans (So 318). Indeed, the problem appears only as one aspect of Huxley’s model of the world, the other being the philosophy of consumption and self-indulgence. As it is argued in the novel, “every discovery in pure science is potentially subversive” (Huxley 198). It demonstrates that even in the scientifically constructed world, science is sometimes treated as a possible enemy.

To conclude, it should be argued that, while thinking about the danger, one has not to deny the obvious benefits of genetic engineering. The current discussion is aware of the ambiguous character of this issue. Scientists often refer to Huxley’s Brave New World as a possible adverse scenario of the future, which has to be avoided. Thinking about the progress as a result of new technology should always be aligned with considering diverse aspects of its implication.

Works Cited

Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World. Random House, 2008.

Rose, Bruce I., and Samuel Brown. “Genetically Modified Babies and a First Application of Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR-Cas9).” Obstetrics & Gynecology, vol. 134, no. 1, 2019, pp. 157–162.

So, Derek. “The Use and Misuse of Brave New World in the CRISPR Debate.” The CRISPR Journal, vol 2, no. 5, 2019, pp. 316–323.

Zhang, Chen, et al. “Genetically modified foods: A critical review of their promise and problems.” Food Science and Human Wellness, vol. 5, no. 3, 2016, pp. 116-123.

Abstract

Technological advancements have been on the increase in the recent past. They have brought into existence many new ideas and concepts that have not been popular with human beings. One of the areas that have witnessed a revolution as a result of technology is procreation. Under normal circumstances, nobody thought that it could be possible to use concepts like genetic engineering to influence the characteristics of an unborn child. The gender and appearance of children have always been thought to be something that human beings cannot control but technology has changed the whole scenario. Through genetic engineering, it is possible to influence the gender and the characteristics of a child before it is born.

The whole process is carried out through various methods that employ distinct procedures to create designer babies. The resultant babies have got their advantages and disadvantages. However, a great concern is the legal, ethical, and moral implications of designer babies. Ethically, there are those who believe that it is wrong to create designer babies. In addition, other individuals believe that babies have both positive and negative moral implications. The creation of designer babies is an outcome of advancements in technology hence the debate should be on the extent to which technology can be applied in changing the way human beings live and the things they believe in.

Interest behind the Choice of Topic

Improved technology has facilitated the isolation of healthy embryos from the ones that exhibit genetic disorders through careful identification. However, there is a possibility that, in the future, the same technology may be used to change the nature of embryos and remove some desirable qualities. A designer baby is a term used to make reference to this unusual scenario. The term is not common among scientists. My research focuses on this sensitive issue of designer babies since it has been one of the most controversial topics in recent times. The topic is important to me because there are many unanswered questions surrounding the whole concept. For instance, many people do not know how it is conducted (Bliss 34).

Advanced reproductive methods entail the use of In Vitro Fertilisation, commonly referred to as IVF to facilitate fertilization of the eggs in test tubes, a procedure that usually takes place outside the body of the mother in a laboratory. The main reason why doctors and parents opt for this procedure is to reduce the possibility of children being delivered with genetic disorders.

Most of the current reproductive technologies used in creating designer babies are not. In the first accepted type, the sex and genes of the baby are determined after choosing the sperm responsible for fertilization (Franklin and Roberts 53). In the second type, the embryos are screened for genetic disorders where only chosen ones to get implanted back into the womb of the mother through a process called Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) (Franklin and Roberts 53).

During my research, I have found out that scientists have been interested to know whether human beings possess information related to human genomes and the fact that they can alter the nature of genes. With time, genetic diseases present in un-born children may be cured by eliminating unhealthy DNA sections and introducing healthy ones. This process has been conducted on animal embryos with apparent success but has not been legalized with human beings.

However, it is acceptable to alter the nature of ailing genes found the cells of mature individuals in a bid to deal with diseases like cystic fibrosis. My assumption has been that genetic engineering which results in designer babies is totally unacceptable but there are some beneficial aspects associated with the concept. There are different procedures involved in creating designer babies and each procedure varies from the other. I would, therefore, be interested in gaining more knowledge of the variations in procedures involved in creating designer babies (Designer Babies 5).

Search for Information and Focus

Variations in Procedures of Creating Designer Babies

In a bid to look for information about the topic, I used different sources, among them are books, journal articles, and internet sources. I also attempted to look for some films but the sources that gave me adequate information were journaled articles, books, and internet sources. The subject was broad but I narrowed down into the variation in procedures used to create designer babies, the legal, ethical and moral principles behind the creation of designer babies and the advantages and disadvantages of designer babies.

The creation of designer babies does not use a single procedure hence there are variations in the procedures used in creating the babies. One of the most commonly used methods is viral injection. In this process, genetic engineers make a virus that has a specific desired gene. Together with a marker, the virus is then introduced into the embryo. The marker gene is important in the process since it produces a color that confirms to the genetic engineers that the egg has accepted the gene. Culturing of the cells goes on up to the time they divide several. The embryos that respond positively to the genes go through implantation into the uterus.

The second method involved in the creation of designer babies entails the use of artificial chromosomes. This procedure varies from viral injection in that it involves addition of entirely new chromosomes. This gives genetic engineers a chance to make modifications on the genetic qualities while ensuring that insertional mutagenesis does not take place. The disadvantage of this procedure is that it can lead to diseases. In addition, both parents are required to be in possession of the extra chromosome for the child to bear the characteristics on the particular chromosome (Important Insights on Designer Babies 2).

The third procedure involved in the creation of designer babies is homologous recombination. It involves the replacement of particular genetic sequences with other sequences that have desirable qualities. Although the procedure is slow, it reduces the risk of insertional mutagenesis. The process through which the genetic sequence of an individual is identified is referred to as genome analysis.

Ethical Principles Regarding Designer Babies

Ttranshumanists, technophiles and libertarians are some of the people who support creation of designer babies. They believe that the society has a moral obligation to make a positive change in the attributes of human beings. It is also possible for them to argue that since individuals are morally allowed to control their bodies, they are also supposed to do the same to their children.

On the other hand, those who oppose designer babies are comprised of those against abortion, which results from certain genetic engineering types. The fact that the embryo is not involved in the decision when the procedures are being conducted is also a major concern for opponents of designer babies. According to them, if the process of genetic engineering is allowed to continue, it will make the individuals who undergo genetic modification feel superior when compared with the rest of the people. The eventual outcome is a society characterised by discrimination (Sonia 929).

Moral Principles Regarding Designer Babies

There are numerous moral issues that surround designer babies. For instance, since invention of PGD has made it possible to determine the gender of a child, there have been concerns that there will be no gender balance in the future. Some countries or societies exhibit preference for a particular gender. For example, in the Chinese culture, boys are valued more than girls since it is believed that they have the capacity to make a difference in their families, something that the girls cannot do. In such a society, most parents would choose to have boys, something which is morally wrong.

The process of creating designer babies also elicits moral criticism since it is believed that the whole process portrays disrespect to God. Children are regarded as Godly gifts whose characteristics cannot and should not be influenced by anybody. As a result, parents who determine the characteristics of their children are looked at as people who do not respect God. In addition, there have been endless legal issues revolving around designer babies. In most countries, genetic engineering is not an accepted concept although genetic engineers have been struggling to prove that the procedures involved are saved. One of the reasons why the concept has not been widely accepted is because it is associated with various complications including certain diseases.

Part III: What I Have Learnt from the Research

Advantages of Designer Babies

From the research, I have learnt that there are several advantages associated with designer babies. To begin with, the process of genetic engineering lowers the chances of the baby being delivered with deadly diseases such as cystic fibrosis, blood disorders such as anaemia, spinal muscular atrophy and Down syndrome among others. For instance, an example is given of Adam Nash, the first designer baby to exist.

He was born through the implantation process in 2000. Since he did not have the right cells, scientists altered his embryo in order to rescue the life of one of the dearest people to him, his sister. His sister suffered from a blood disorder that threatened his own life. The scientists chose an embryo that was devoid of the disorder. Adam therefore turned to be his sister’s donor, something that increased his survival chances.

The second advantage of designer babies is that it helps parents who suffer from inherited diseases such as hypertension, diabetes and obesity among others or diseases such as cancer, thalassemia and arthritis to shield future generations from inheriting genes that possess such diseases. Faulty genes are screened to get the good ones that are used in the uterus during implantation. This guarantees a healthy generation. Parents therefore may advocate for genetic engineering in order to prevent the children from genetic diseases.

Disadvantages of Designer Babies

Although designer babies have their advantages, I have also learnt that they still have disadvantages. The first one is that the use of genetic engineering geared towards enhancing genetic attributes among human beings generates unending controversies. Many questions are raised concerning the ethical appropriateness of creating designer babies whose appearance and physical ability is enhanced. Different people argue that designer babies separate procreation from sex, which is against the religious teachings. This might eventually lead to the plummeting of biodiversity in human beings hence a long-term calamity (UseBrinks 31).

Eugenics is the study of the chances of making improvements in the qualities of human population or human beings. It uses means like reducing reproduction among individuals who have genetic problems or believed to possess undesirable traits which could be inherited. It is believed that the introduction of designer babies definitely affects biodiversity to a great extent. In addition, when parents decide for their children the traits they should have, they deprive of their children a chance to have voice in their lives. For instance, parents who have great interest in sports will advocate for the engineering of an athletics ability in their children who may be interested in different things. As a result, the freedom of the child to make a choice is reduced.

The third disadvantage of designer babies is that if allowed to take place, genetic engineering affects the society negatively. It leads to unjustified fear or hatred being directed towards foreign individuals or any person whose appearance is different from that of other people. Rejection of persons with genetic complications might be a common thing. They might be regarded as gene poor, causing them to be excluded by other members of the society. In certain parts of the world, people who suffer from genetic defects are exposed to discriminatory treatment.

The discrimination is based on there traits or characteristics that are different from those of other individuals. Children who are born and raised by rich parents undergo genetic enhancements hence they tend to consider themselves privileged than children born of poor parents. This creates a disadvantage for the children from poor families since their chances are limited. Individuals who cannot afford genetic engineering might therefore be despised hence creating societal gaps. In addition, in many countries all around the world, there is a sex discrimination that allows men to rule and to set their particular rules.

Self Reflection

Generally, I have learnt that genetic engineering is a complicated concept that should not be played with. A single mistake during the process may lead to alterations in the lives of successive generations. This mostly happens due to the fact that predicting when particular mutations may result into diseases or viruses may not be possible. As human beings, it is important to understand that one does not make a choice to come into the world. As a result, it is not possible to control everything including the traits that children should possess.

This research has enabled me to enhance my research skills since I have learnt how to use different sources to conduct research. I have also learnt that research is an intensive undertaking that requires enough preparation in order to collect factual and accurate information. I have successfully written a comprehensive research paper that sheds more light on designer babies. The research is an important tool that can be used by an individual who wishes to gain insightful information on genetic engineering and the process of creating designer babies.

Works Cited

Bliss, John. Designer Babies , New York: Raintree, 2012. Print.

Designer Babies 2002. Web.

Franklin, Sarah and Celia Roberts. Born and Made: An Ethnography of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2006. Print.

Important Insights on Designer Babies 2012. Web.

UseBrinks. “It’s a Designer Baby!”: Opinions on Regulation of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis.” UCLA Journal of Law and Technology. (2005): 5-10. Web.

Sonia, Suter. “A Brave New World of Designer Dabies.” Berkeley Technology Law Journal (2007): 929-937.

Technology being used in the world today has changed the world to suit us better. The changes relate on how well the people are comfortable in the world, and recount from basic needs of individuals to human aspirations such as knowledge. Changing the world does not take a basic step; it is a complicated and unpredictable process that deals with risks occurrences, unexpected costs and unexpected benefits. Technology has brought about genetic engineering.

Genetic engineering is the alteration of the genetic materials by scientific intervention in genetic process with a significance of gaining new substances or enhancing productivity in living organisms. It interferes with the genetic materials of an organism producing a different heritable materials induced outside the organism through the invasion of the DNA molecule in cells.

Genes used in genetic engineering have a high impact on health and disease, therefore the inclusion of the genetic process alters the genes that influence human behavior and traits. The establishment of genetic engineering has raised many ethical and legal questions, but its significance relies on how different individual perspire the act in their cultural, religion and ethical boundaries.

Scientist have been able to use genetic engineering as a way of creating plants, animals, and micro- organisms by manipulating genes in a way that does not occur naturally. The modified genetically organism spread though nature and interbreed with the natural organism interfering with the future generation.

Genetic engineering has its futurist obligation and its reliability on its concepts should be avoided. “For better or for worse, genetic engineering will affect the major environmental problems of our time- overpopulation, pollution, erosion and the rapid loss of biodiversity” (Anderson, 2000). We should be creative in the real world and let the world’s production be defined by nature.

Genetic engineering might cure diseases and enhance expansion of the genetic repertoire; it has enhanced food productivity and played a vital role in the agricultural sector. In genetic engineering, the DNA molecule is genetically altered through the process of gene splicing, where by the DNA strand is cut into half and joined with a strand from another species (Nuenke, 2001).

When the human DNA molecule is interfered with and joined to another strand a new DNA molecule is created and the normal genes interfered with through the convergence of the two DNA molecule strands. For example a whole chromosome may be lost or gained such as an extra copy of the small chromosome that causes Down syndrome, or part of a chromosome may ne inverted, but be fully intact.

“And they explain how dominant and recessive genes affect us and how they are transmitted from generation to generation” (Nuenke, 2001). This brings about a revolution of a new human being from its original content and transforming everything that is known in the human body.

Genetic engineering will have an effect on our world, not only on food production but will cause effects on humans and the society. From the cultural perspective, human beings are inviolable and live free according to their rights in the society.

The society accepts them the way they are and the type of life they live, therefore introducing genetic engineering in the human mode of living interferes with the basic concepts and their rights in the society: thus degrading the human subjects into objects that can be designed according to the human knowledge.

The society to accept such a change will have an effect on both the human beings and its environment which we can barely imagine. Introducing genetic engineering in the society means the interference of the parental whim and bringing an artificial generation that has different genetic material from the parental genetics.

Genetic engineering in the last few decades has tried to dominate and control nature and humans causing environmental crisis which the world faces today. Genetic engineering on plants and animal gives the power to dominate nature in an inventive and powerful way creating a lot of pressure on environmental movements. It controls nature intimidating human beings, like other species and making them objects of the manipulative control of genetic engineering.

If we cannot prevent this, then, to protect the environment will become a future burden. The environment is the main component of the relation between humans and the rest of nature. Such an environmental relationship may be soon being imposed upon us and children; hence it must take a lead in alerting the society on the dangers of genetic engineering (Anderson, 2000). Genetic engineering has the ability of transforming the children in the world from their natural assertive to being a commodity.

The application of the germline genetic engineering is believed to convert a child to a commercial product with a high degree of normality and meaning. People who will fall short of productivity will be considered as unproductive while the genetically desirable will be productive economically and politically. This would only increase discrimination in the society and the world by changing the way people live (Streiffer, 2005).

Genetic engineering has been identified with concepts such as cloning and HG E, which determines the child’s life course. The cloning system undermines the child senses and its achievement hence interfering with the genetic materials. The use of the cloning system in the society would be a disastrous concept (Streiffer, 2005).

Parents would likely make children adapt to social means with concern to physical ability, appearance and abilities, even though many of those social norms are inherently oppressive. For instance, disabled children have showed fear that the scientific technology would reduce society tolerance for those genetic losses. If genes pre-disposing people to homosexuality are discovered, it is certain that many people would attempt to engineer the genetic genes out of their offspring.

High rates of cancer and deaths will be experienced if genetic engineering is not avoided on human being. The presentation of the viral vectors that bring the alteration of the DNA molecule results to some complications such as tumors that at a later stage develop cancerous infections. When the transgenes are inverted into the genome they interfere the normal functioning of the genes and cause mutation. The introduction of genetic engineering does not predict its outcomes.

Curing diseases is one of its advantaged and certainly very few people will be against diseases such as Lesch-nyhan syndrome. Implantation genetics have been introduced in the world today to assist in the screening process of genetic diseases. This type of genetic engineering is applicable in phenotype enhancements, whereby genetic manipulation will differ on human heights or muscle mass enlargements or make people look thin.

The inventions of such genetic engineering will have an impact on people because many people will get involved in such ideas while other will neglect such ideas. Changing the inheritable genes of human will affect the structure of the society and create an economic significance through the inherited genes.

In the future generations, if genetic engineering is going to be used on human body then a total interference of the human body mechanism will be hindered. This will range from alteration of the DNA molecule which carries the genetic materials. The normal functioning of the DNA molecule will be altered by the technological introduction of genetic engineering to suit the human’s mode of life.

“A new species is characterized by the inability of its members to engage (under normal conditions) in a productive sexual union with organisms that are outside the species.” (Spier, 2002).

Scientists have come up with a way of changing the genes color, heights and body weight. Many people in the world have their own preferences according to the color, height and weight, therefore they preference having a generation that suits their preferences. Many people are in demand of having there DNA structure interfered with and undergoing a genetic engineering which alters the normal functioning of the DNA molecule (Streiffer, 2005).

Genetic engineering will transform the world completely. It has its capacity in changing the world in so many dimensions producing either positive or negative results. Concerns will be on the rise especially on our future generation especially on genetic engineering. Concerns will arise as a result of genetic engineering which will range from ethical issues to lack of enough knowledge on the effects of genetic engineering. Once the gene is altered and placed in species the process cannot be reversed again.

New introduced genes may also act differently with the natural genes and result to an effect on organism which is termed as unpredictable. After the use of genetic engineering in the world, the world will not be in the position to reverse the normal functioning of the genes, it is a process that will be continued over the next generations and to achieve the normal generation before the occurrence of genetic engineering will not be an easy process or it will not occur at all (Rabino, 2003).

In this case, scientists are ready to carry out the genetic engineering but they won’t be held responsible for the outcomes of genetic engineering. The society should be educated on the positive and negative effects of genetic engineering (Rabino, 2003).

References

Anderson, C. E. (2000). Genetic engineering: Dangers and opportunities. The Futurist; Mar/Apr 2000; 34, 2; ProQuest.

Nuenke, M. (2001). Improving Nature: The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering. Mankind Quarterly; spring 2001; 41, 3; ProQuest.

Rabino, I. (2003). Genetic Testing and Its Implications: Human Genetics Researchers Grapple with Ethical Issues.Empire State College, State University of New York Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Summer, 2003), pp. 365-402 Sage Publications, Inc.

Spier, R. E. (2002). Towards a new human species? Science; Jun 7, 2002; 296, 5574; ProQuest.

Streiffer, R. (2005). At the Edge of Humanity: Human Stem Cells, Chimeras, and Moral StatusKennedy Institute of Ethics Journal; Dec 2005; 15, 4; ProQuest pg. 347

As a matter of fact, genetic testing in the workplace is considered to be an advantageous phenomenon that should be implemented in the process of controlling and influencing the job market. However, it is worth stating that there is no common opinion regarding this issue, and that is, the decision cannot be taken until all the potential risks are eliminated. The genetic testing is believed to be beneficial not only for the employers but for the employees as well. Nevertheless, one should not forget about the ethical side of the problem as it should also be addressed. The main purpose of the paper is to evaluate and critically discuss the ethical concerns regarding the implementation of genetic testing in the workplace and to provide potential resolutions to the dilemmas.

Ethical Dilemma of the Genetic Testing in the Workplace

Due to technological advances and the rapid development of science, genetic analysis becomes commonly used. Nowadays, it is possible to analyze the makeup of the genes in the body of a human being. It is worth highlighting that understanding the genetic peculiarities of the diseases and interrelation with the environment the enterprises came up with a fresh idea, namely the application of the genetic testing to control and reduce the level of employees’ suffering form from the illnesses because of the working conditions. However, this question consequently led to the debates regarding the medical, social, and ethical sides of the problem.

According to recent researches, genetic testing will beneficially impact the index of occupational diseases (Genetics in the workplace: Implications for occupational safety and health, 2009). It can be considered as the perfect tool for protecting the employees for possible risks of adverse outcomes. Genetic testing is supposed to help employers hire workers without health-related issues. Furthermore, it will secure the families that can lose the member.

Although being focused on disease control and securing the employees, genetic testing is a controversial approach while some ethical dilemmas are associated with this issue. First and foremost, it should be highlighted that there are two theories that commonly used while discussing this problem, namely utilitarian and virtue ethics. The ethical dilemma is focused on answering the question is genetic testing useful for the working process? Does it have to do with the discrimination, and what will be the consequences of the implementation of this approach?

It should be stated that the genetic analysis has almost no difference in comparison to other types of medical research (Brandt-Rauf, Borak, & Deubner, 2015). However, the problem is that the result obtained by genetic testing can be interpreted in a wrong way or misused. As a matter of fact, the human organism responds to the hazardous environment or materials.

Occupational diseases are usually the consequence of the interaction between the human being and the hazardous chemicals at the workplace. Genetic testing can evaluate the potential level of risk and reduce it. Scientists usually refer to the term susceptibility examining the possible ways the human body may react to the hazardous environment. Although on the one hand identifying the risk group is beneficial for their health protection, from the other, the implementation of the policies may lead to discrimination and economic difficulties of those whose health aimed to be protected.

Moreover, the policies can be viewed as the desire to control not only the working place but the staff as well. The economic factor influences the employer and employees, and that is, should be considered before application of the genetic policy. The employers should be ready to cover high spending on the health care. The employees will benefit from the protection as they will be healthier; however, the economic aspect will significantly affect their decision, being at the risk of losing the job they can prefer to stay and get compensation from the work in the case something had happened.

The discrimination of the employees after the genetic testing is the major issue that demands the solution (Brandt-Rauf & Gershon, 2011). Even in the case when the employee is healthy he can be fired. To get better involved in the problem, it would be informative to draw attention to the following examples that illustrate the discrimination. The results of the genetic testing revealed that the employee was a carrier of Gaucher’s disease.

Although it does not affect his health and he can only pass this disease to children, he got fired, despite the fact that the illness does not affect the work performance. Another real story proves that people can be rejected during the interview in every place they come. According to the results of genetic testing, a man had an asymptomatic hemochromatosis. Although the companies told that they would like to take him, they rejected because he had some genetic issues. The man was rejected in every interview.

Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics

In order to get better involved in the issue and provide some possible ways of solution of the ethical dilemmas, the issue should be analyzed by the two major philosophical movements, namely utilitarianism and virtue ethics.

Utilitarianism is focused on the describing the action as the moral one in the case it provides the community with the positive consequences. It is worth highlighting that utilitarianism is considered to be a form of philosophy based on the outcomes. The fundamental idea is that the morally good action has the positive outcome. In the case morally bad action occurs for the sake of the larger group of people, the action can be justified.

Normative ethics comprises three major directions, namely deontology, consequentalism, and virtue ethics. The theories have some common points, however, differ in the core meaning. It is easy to understand by taking into consideration the following example. In the case the person needs help, and it is evident, the follower of the utilitarian theory will think about consequences and the impact they will have on a greater group, the deontologist will act according to the moral rules and principles, and a person who follows the virtue ethics will be sure that helping people is noble and charitable (Nelson & Kelsey, 2014). According to the virtue ethics, the consequences are useless in the case the individual suffers, from this point of view, genetic testing is not appropriate and should not be implemented.

The ethical dilemmas can be solved on the base of philosophical theories. People, who follow the utilitarianism, will point their attention towards the consequences and possible implications the application of genetic testing will have on the individual and society in general. According to the principles of the utilitarianism, the society will benefit from the implementation of the genetic testing, despite the fact that some individuals will suffer.

The good of the larger group is in priority. First and foremost, by eliminating the risks of the occupational diseases, the employer secures his future expenses on compensation. Hiring only healthy workers is discrimination; however, the productivity, effectiveness, and the revenue are likely to increase with impressive speed. The society will benefit from the application of the genetic testing. Using the genetic tests at the workplace people get results, innovate the process, improve the development, and make progress. The ethics may change, the utilitarianism is centered on the good of the society, and it should be highlighted that genetic test will improve the living standards and will facilitate the life.

The results of the implementation of the genetic tests can be estimated; however, ethics cannot. All the technical advances were made in contrast to ethics. In the vast majority of the cases, the ethics change overtime. Ethics in the relation to the religion was an obstacle concerning the development of the science and technological progress. Nevertheless, the society overcame these difficulties; however, the amount of scientists who suffered is impressive. The question arises, would the world be different if religion was not an obstacle to the progress?

Resolution

The resolution to this dilemma can be the following. First and foremost, the employer should hire the worker even if he has some genetic issues, but only those that do not influence the performance of the tasks. Every person has the right place in the world where he or she can be successful if everyone will find this niche, the society will experience the rapid development and improvement, the number of jobless people will be reduced. The world changes every day; the globalization process gains momentum, and the society cannot follow the ethical or moral values that were of a current interest during the ancient times.

Ethics is changeable, and that is, the genetic test will not be considered as the discrimination as they aim not to discriminate but to secure and protect people and to improve the effectiveness, for the society to benefit. Furthermore, there is the notion of ethical relativism that stresses that there are no universal rules, and certain actions can be considered as the moral for one person and immoral for another. One should keep in mind that morality and ethics are not the synonyms and sometimes may contradict each other as vegetarians believe that it is not moral to eat meat; however, they are sure that the government has no right to force anyone to eat only vegetables as it is unethical.

Every breakthrough was not welcomed in the society at first. It is in human nature not to trust and reject everything new. However, it should be stressed that ethics catches up and changes to be appropriate for the new conditions. Genetic testing is a completely new level of development, and it is no doubt that the majority of people are against of it. The reason is the fear of changes, innovation, and adjusting to new circumstances. The progress would not be possible without overcoming the difficulties. Taking into consideration all the benefits that genetic tests bring along, the best solution will be to test the system on some corporation and draw the conclusions. People will never know the results until they try.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it should be pointed out that the implementation of the genetic testing in the workplace demands further discussions and investigations. Before making a decision all the advantages and disadvantages of the application of the policies should be taken into consideration. Furthermore, ethical dilemmas should be addressed to and solved. As the matter of fact, the implementation of the genetic testing in the working process on the one hand will secure the employees; however, from the other it will lead to increasing health care costs for the employer and difficulties in finding a new job for the workers. Nevertheless, the society will benefit from the application of the genetic tests as it will contribute to effectiveness, productivity, and prosperity.

References

Brandt-Rauf, P., Borak, J., & Deubner, D. (2015). Genetic screening in the workplace. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 57(3), 17-18.

Brandt-Rauf, S., & Gershon, R. (2011). Genes, jobs, and justice. Ethics & medicine, 27(1), 51-61.

Genetics in the workplace: Implications for occupational safety and health. (2009). Cincinnati, OH: Createspace Independent Publishing.

Nelson, H., & Kelsey, K. (2014). Genetic susceptibility in the workplace: A scientific and ethical challenge. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 71(4), 229-230.