Sociology is a branch of science derived from the word society; it is the study of human character and behavioral conduct. Usually the surrounding society and environment defines an individual’s behavior especially after one reaches adulthood. However, some people argue that economy and political surrounding nurture one’s behavior.
Genetics and sociology
The writer of the essay describes nature as the genes one inherits from their parents. However, from my personal knowledge and exposure, his/her definition of nature is a ‘new’ ideology. Nature is the physical composition of either plants or animals. Although both external and internal features of an individual like skin color or intelligence are inheritable, exposure to harmful substances like chemicals, medicine and processed food can alter the skin color or health.
Furthermore, the writer describes inheritable diseases like cancer as natural asserting that the infected or affected persons pick up different behavior from experience. I do not concur with the author’s assertion that chronic illnesses like cancer or diabetes originate from nature; I think they originate from modern unbecoming lifestyles.
Additionally, familial diseases like cancer and diabetes do not influence the behavior of an individual; they only change one’s lifestyle. Although all the aspects in the society affect one’s character, diseases can never define the behavior of an individual. Scientists like Kleinsmith posit that every human being has cancerous cells (67). However, the cells become malignant only when the immune system is unable to control their growth due to poor eating habits.
Sociological theories
A number of sociological theories like the rational choice theory examine the impact of environment on one’s behavior. The theory relates social behavior to other factors like economy and politics whereby the urge to perform a specific action or task by an individual is not behavioral. Before someone steals or become a politician s/he focuses on achieving a certain goal. The person usually ignores the methodology or means involved when pursuing his/her goal.
Therefore, the urge to achieve a personal goal cannot determine ones behavior. From the description of the sociological theories, the term sociology can take a wide range of definitions and not only on impact of society or environment has to human behavior, but also on the past occurrences. On the other hand, the author of the essay bases his/her definition and understanding of sociology on interpretive theory.
Although family, especially parents determine the behavior of their children; politics and economy rarely change or determine the character of a child. In sociology, politics determine the character of an individual when he/she is born within a political family (Nash 2). Similarly, children born out of the political class rarely consider politics an important aspect in their lives.
Therefore, I strongly differ with the writer’s interpretation on the effect of economy to human behavior. If the decline in economy negatively affects one’s behavior, then all unemployed people in the current society would be criminals. Most young people in the current society have no jobs and do menial jobs for survival, which is contrary to the author perspective. However, the credit crunch, political turmoil, and poor economy of the world do significantly change human way of life.
Conclusion
In summary, chronic genetic diseases like cancer do not determine human behavior because they are preventable or manageable. Additionally, a decline in economy does not compel the youths or unemployed persons to venture into crime rather it is a motivation to work hard. Finally, the sociology theories do not limit the definition of sociology to human behavior in relation to the environment and society at hand.
Works cited
Kleinsmith, Lewis. Principles of Cancer Biology, 2006. USA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
Nash, Kate. Contemporary Political Sociology. United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell press. 2000.
There are three common types of sexual behaviors in human beings these are:- homosexuality, heterosexuality, and bisexuality. These are the behaviors that one has been oriented to either through parents, friends or the society. A homosexual is a person who is attracted to people of the same gender either physically, emotionally or sexually. Women who are attracted to their fellow women are known as lesbians. Men who are attracted to their fellow men are referred to as gays. Heterosexuals are people who are attracted physically, emotionally, and sexually to people of the opposite sex. Heterosexuality is therefore the desire for the opposite sex. Bisexuality is a sexual behavior where an individual is attracted to both males and females (Anon. “Bisexuality Defined” 2). The degree of attraction may differ according to the individual personality.
Bisexuals have a higher rate of sexual activities than the homosexuals or heterosexual. These attractions may either be emotional, romantic or physical. It’s a sexual behavior that has been observed over many years in human societies. Bisexuality is more common in women as compared to men; this is because women are strongly affected sexually by their background and culture. A bisexual may choose to have one party from each side or to have a multiple of them (Fox 163).
Characteristics of a Bisexual
Bisexuality is a term that is not clearly understood by many. Some people may be bisexual without even their knowledge. There is no direct way that has been identified to describe who is a bisexual (Anon. Bisexuality Defined, 3). Many people expect bisexuals to have specific characteristics; however, it is very hard to tell who is a bisexual by physical appearance. Bisexuals are people from different occupations, different races, different education levels, different cultures, and they come in all sizes or shapes. They can not be said to be a specific group of people because they come from all aspects of life. A bisexual can be a doctor, a teacher, an American, an African among others. Bisexuals suffer discrimination and hostility from the society because of their actions which are termed sinful. This has forced bisexuals to join up with lesbians and gays in their fight for civil rights.
There are people who believe that sexual attraction is not sinful but the actions performed in response to these attractions. Although there might be many bisexuals in our society, they are not commonly spoken of because most people are assumed to be either homosexuals or heterosexuals (Orndorff 110).
What it means to be a bisexual
Most people describe themselves as being bisexual when they feel that they are attracted sexually or physically to both genders. Bisexuals can be found in any country, community or culture. Most people experience bisexual feelings but do not classify themselves as bisexuals. The reason for this is that most societies do not accept bisexual behaviors and therefore it becomes difficult for such people to stand out.
Some people are bisexuals just for pleasure and the desire to explore different ways of getting sexual satisfaction but do not regard themselves as being bisexuals. Bisexuals often feel isolated from others in the society and experience a lot of pressure to be either heterosexual or homosexual. Bisexual is just a normal type of sexuality but people usually find it difficult to comprehend (Anon. Common Myths of Bisexuality, 1) From research it has been found that the value of any person’s identity should not be based on the individual’s origin. This is because human beings are diverse creatures and their behavior changes over time. It is assumed that bisexuality is a period in life that one goes through. It is a continuing process that many people undergo as a part of recognizing their sexual inclination. Mostly, bisexuality results from being a gay or lesbian. According to a study done by Ron Fox, where he studied 900 bisexuals, he found out that in every three bisexuals, one was previously gay or lesbian (Storr 114). Bisexuality can be a short period of transition or it can last for a very long time.
Cause of bisexuality
Many people belief that homosexuality, heterosexuality or bisexuality is inborn behavior. They believe that there are results of genetics or parental hormones or sexual abuse from parents. Others believe that these behaviors are matters of choice or they result from socialization and peer pressure. There are others who believe that these behaviors are as a result of all the above factors (Anon. Bisexuality Defined, 2).
Bisexuality from genetics
Bisexuality is not only common in human beings but also in animals. Many scientists have tried to prove that bisexual is not a matter of choice but as a result of genetics. Genetics and the way a person is brought up play a major role in influencing someone’s sexual behavior. Doctors have found out that there is no one person that can be able to alter his/her sexual behavior. According to them, people are either born as heterosexuals, bisexuals or homosexuals (Storr 115).
The way a child has been brought up also influences his/her sexual behaviors. For instance, persons who have been brought up by single mothers (or where one parent is neglectful) may end up being bisexuals. This is because they try to search for love and attraction which they were denied when growing. In the process they get attracted to both genders and end up being bisexuals.
Socializations
The agents of socializations are the family; school, society, and peers. Majority of youths choose to be socialized by their peers and may acquire some behaviors that are not acceptable. Majority of the bisexuals result from peer influence. They get into bisexuality without even understanding what they are doing and before they realize they are already into it. This has resulted from failure of the society and the family to take their roles of socializing their youths. They leave them on their own before they are mature and they get exposed to all forms of unacceptable behaviors. There is therefore the need for introduction of sex education in schools especially primary schools so that people get the right information concerning such sex behaviors. This will help one in deciding which sex orientation he/she wants to be.
Bisexuality out of choice
Just like in homosexuality, there are people who know very well about bisexuality and chose to be bisexuals. Most people in our societies are either gays or lesbians because they have chosen to be so. In some countries it has been legalized and we have witnessed gay and lesbian marriages. Others choose not to be heterosexuals or homosexuals but prefer to be bisexuals. There are some communities where bisexuals are acceptable in the society and they usually stand out and declare their identity (Storr 114). Some of these bisexuals are actually allowed to marry thus committing themselves in long term relationships.
High sex drive
Bisexuals have been associated with high rates of sexual activity as compared to heterosexuals or homosexuals. They do not get enough satisfaction from their homo or hetero partners and ends up being bisexuals. From research it has been found that bisexual men have a lesser number of happy families than heterosexuals. They have also been found to masturbate more often than heterosexuals. Bisexual women have been found to have stronger and more orgasms in a given week than homosexuals or heterosexuals (Weinberg, Williams, & Pryor 99).
This high sexual drives has forced them to have multiple partners from both genders in their desire to get sexual satisfaction.
Masculinity
A research done on bisexuals showed that both bisexual men and women are masculine. They have self pride and fewer chances of suffering from mental instabilities. They are confident of their identity and like exploring on sexuality. They do not get sexual satisfaction with a single partner and they believe the only way they can be satisfied is to have sexual relationships with both sexes. They also have a high sex drive which could be from parental hormones or acquired.
Levels of bisexuality
Some people believe that everyone is bisexual in one way or another although this is not true. Every one experiences attraction to a person of the same sex at certain times in life. This does not mean that one is bisexual because most of these attractions fade away before even realizing them. Doing something with a friend of the same sex does not classify one as being a bisexual and neither does it mean that never having sex with both a male and female excludes someone from being a bisexual (Szymanski 2). Most bisexuals have not yet had maximum sexual relations with either male or female and they are yet to explore that.
Being a bisexual does not mean being attracted equally to both genders. One can be attracted more to one gender as compared to the other one. There is no limit as to what extent one should be attracted. Some bisexuals are not actually attracted to gender but to the personality of an individual or other character trait (Szymanski 4). Some bisexuals do not require regular sexual intercourse to get their happiness or satisfaction.
Some bisexuals are actually monogamous and they get their satisfaction by having one partner at a given time. There are some who may choose to have open relationships with different personality on different grounds. Others may decide to marry for long term relationships (Anon. Common Myths of Bisexuality 6). It is normally a personal decision how one will handle his/her relation but sometimes it is influenced by the other partners.
Effects of Bisexuality
Just like other sexual orientations such as heterosexuality and homosexuality, bisexuality has an equal number of dangers involved. Such dangers include contracting sexually transmitted diseases. It is the responsibility of the partners to take maximum protection while having sexual intercourse. It is believed that bisexuals are at a higher risk of contracting these diseases as compared to heterosexuals. One of the negative effects associated with bisexuality is that most partners do not speak out their feelings and ends up hurting other people or themselves. Most bisexuals who are already in marriage find it hard to express their feelings to their spouses and they continue performing their homosexual affairs in hiding. They fear the consequences of disclosing their feeling to their spouses but more often than not these spouses end up finding the truth and this leads to breakups of marriages (Weinberg, Williams, & Pryor 97).
Most bisexuals are rejected and discriminated against by the society. Family and friends reject them and consider them sinners. This causes stress and depression on the victims which can even lead to death. The society has failed to understand that this is a normal way of life and that they should not see bisexuals as the problem but the actions themselves. Other bisexuals live with self denial and it gets hard for them to accept their situation or even tell their friends.
Conclusion
Bisexuality is one of the three common types of sexual behaviors the other two being heterosexuality and homosexuality. It is a sexual behavior where an individual is attracted to both sexes. Bisexuals have a higher rate of sexual activities than the homosexuals or heterosexual. These attractions may either be emotional, romantic, or physical. It’s a sexual behavior that has been observed over many years in human societies. It is hard to tell who is a bisexual, heterosexual, or a homosexual physically. Many people expect bisexuals to have specific characteristics but it is very hard to tell who is a bisexual by physical appearance. Bisexuals are people from different occupations, different races, different education levels, different cultures, and they come in all sizes or shapes. Most people describe themselves as being bisexual when they feel that they are attracted sexually or physically to both genders.
Many people believe that homosexuality, heterosexuality, and bisexuality are inborn behaviors. They are as a result of genetics or parental hormones or sexual abuse from parents. Others believe that these behaviors are matters of choice or they result from socialization and peer pressure. Many scientists have tried to prove that bisexual is not a matter of choice but as a result of genetics. Genetics and the way a person is brought up play a major role in influencing someone’s sexual behavior. Doctors have found that there is no person that can be able to alter his/her sexual behavior. According to these doctors, people are either born as heterosexuals, bisexuals or homosexuals. Others become bisexual either by choice or peers influence. High sex drive and masculinity have also been found as causes of bisexuality. Some people believe that everyone is bisexual in one way or another although this is not true. Everyone experiences attraction to a person of the same sex at certain times in life. This does not mean that one is bisexual because most of these attractions fade away before even their full realization.
Human behavioral genetics is the study that aims to understand both genetics and environmental conditions influencing human social behavior’ (Epstein, 49).A single gene does not influence human behavior because behavior consists of complex traits involving several genes. Behavioral genetics also examines the role of genetics in animal and human behavior.
Twin study method is a research method for examining genetics and environment influences on the medical and behavioral characteristics’ (Nancy, 56). Twin study tries to establish whether genes play a major role in our ability to understand and manipulate social relationships. It tries to compare two most common genetic designs.These include Mono zygotic (MZ) and Di zygotic (DZ) twins which are from the same family. Mono zygotic twins share almost all genetic make ups while Di zygotic twins only share half of the composition of the genes. Twin study method addresses questions such as what effects do environmental factors have on the twin similarities and twin differences.
(GWA) study which stands for Genome –wide association is a method that seeks to establish the components of common human diseases and recent advances in the next generation technologies’ (Nancy, 203). The study has been used to identify genetic variations which are susceptible to diseases and other physiological traits such as an individual’s, age height and hair color contributing to it.
Social behaviors studied and reported in the article
There are various social behaviors which have been reported in this article.Mentions in the article include: empathy, social stress and aggression, popularity, parenting, leadership and politics and finally music.They have been looked at into details and how some of these social behaviors are influenced by the trends.
Empathy
By definition empathy is one’s ability to accommodate other people’s feelings. The study was conducted by Knafo and friends were contributors. Major contributions to empathy are genes and environmental factors. Between 14 and 20 months no genetic influences were found to impact empathy.While between 24 and 36 months strong environmental factors influenced changes. Overall both genetics and environmental factors contributed to the change in empathy and at the same time changes were noted during the child’s growth.
Latest studies designed to examine the role of specific genes contributing to empathy tested a single intronic previously associated with autism and maternal sensitivity which found lower behavioral and dispositional empathy’. (Craig, 356)
Social stress and aggression
Social stress is defined as the social contact and its influences on human and animal behavior. On the other hand aggression has been defined as individual independent reaction towards a particular thing. Aggression has a major contribution to an individual’s success in the future encounters. Twin studies have revealed that over 50% in aggressive traits is accounted for heredity’ (Craig, 449). A rise in the test hormone levels linked with dominance and competitiveness is as a result of aggression of an individual.
Music
Music is the universal language of mankind’ (Longfellow, 463). The twin study suggests that a way of looking at whether an individual has music genes in them is to look at whether the person uses music as a tool for communicating.
Parenting
This is the other human behavior looked at.parenting is usually as a result of forces behind one’s empathy. Twin studies have shown that parenting is a hereditary trait because there is a correlation between genes and environment in relation to the mother and father attitudes to parenting. Life history behaviors have influences on decisions such as how long to last the relationships, how many children to have and the trend for multiple mating.
Politics and leadership
Politics and leadership is another human behavior looked at in this article. It explains that leadership is influenced by genetic variables which associated with desire to achieve and lead. The study also finds that moderate leadership heredity is found in women. In twin studies it suggests that liberal and conservative ideologies are hereditary.
Popularity
This is the next human behavior explained in the article into details. Popularity has been defined as an individual’s urge to be recognized by a certain majority for what they do. Rogers has stated popularity as the easiest thing to achieve and at the same time to be the most difficult thing to achieve.Popularity is usually geared towards social and economic benefits. An individual’s economic social decision may be fairly or selfishly motivated. Selfish motives may be out to exploit other parties who are involved.
Two economic game plans have been used to explain how popularity works. First in the dictator game (DG) economic game plan ,the ‘dictator’ makes a decision to distribute money between himself and a second party ‘ the recipient ‘.since the recipient is completely powerless ,the allotment of money by the dictator can be seen as a measure of pure humanity’ (Longfellow ,501).In another experimental economic game plan known as ultimate game plan(UG) addresses a tradeoff between selfishness and fair play.In this situation involving two parties , first participant proposes a split sum of money while the second proposes whether to accept it. If the players do not accept it they receive no money. Proposals are usually on 60%-40% basis and if there is a selfish motive the other subject gets a minimum amount.
References
Craig, Albert. Human genetics and social behaviors. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2008. Print
Epstein, Forsyth. Leadership and politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007. Print.
Longfellow, Robert. Human behavior. New York: Rutledge, 2006.Print.
Nancy, Hullo. Cultural, Political, historical and Social Aspects. New York: Wordsworth Publisher, 2004.Print. Patricia. East
Doss, C., & Rajith, B. B. (2012). Computational Refinement of Functional Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Associated with ATM Gene. Plos ONE, 7(4), 1-11. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0034573
Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) refers to a genetic distinction occurring in humans. A unit SNP is a depiction of dissimilarity in one DNA building block (nucleotide). Every DNA contains SNPs in the ratio of 1:300 in every nucleotide contained in the body of humans. Usually, variation occurs between genes making it possible for researchers to identify genes responsible for diseases.
SNPs play a fundamental role in researching human health through utilization of genetic differences (Doss & Rajith, 2012). It is evident that SNPs can be useful in determining various responses of drugs to persons, and the presence of certain risks that concern environmental exposure.
The study aims at refining and separating SNPs that relate to ATM gene. ATM gene exists due to activation by DNA strands breaks. It is responsible for the presence of various proteins that culminate to DNA damage and apoptosis. The aim of computational refinement was to identify SNPs and the result of substituting amino acids in the ATM gene (Doss & Rajith, 2012). The genetic variations could be useful in determining diverse forms of cancer. The study concentrates on the functional effects of SNPs occurring in the coding area.
The SNPs found in this part can transform a lone amino acid present in a protein molecule. The SNPs found in non coding areas are significant in impacting gene splicing plus non coding RNA (4). The study aims at analyzing any deleterious possibilities of SNPs in relation to the ATM gene.
This was possible via use of dissimilar computation methods in order to arrive to better results. The study develops knowledge of computational methods of research, hence revealing both functional plus non functional variants occurring in coding and non coding areas (Doss & Rajith, 2012).
The article uses SNPs to create an understanding of disease in molecular perspective. This is possible because of the characteristics evident in SNPs in creating, damaging or altering coding sites (Doss & Rajith, 2012). The article uses SNPs in the determination of areas of genes that are vulnerable to disease attack.
The use of SNPs in determining phenotypic variations is evident in the article. The non functional SNPs are likely to trigger cellular changes thus leading to undesired disturbances and vulnerability of acquiring cancer. In the attempt to reveal the relationship between genetic mutation and phenotypic distinctions, the article employed SNP screening by utilizing distinct algorithms such as SIFT plus UTRScan (Reiner, Lettre, Nalls, Ganesh, Mathias, Austin & Kubo, 2011).
These methods of the study were significant in revealing SNPs via scores plus annotations. The method was not suitable for determining deleterious SNPs in the ATM gene and the results to the working of proteins due to certain limitations. The article uses SNPs in a suitable manner by employing a system that performs integration of scores from the in silico perspectives. This enabled identification of disease causing mutation occurring in unique regions.
The article utilizes Bayersian method to perform the analysis that yielded the results of SNPs in Translation modification (PTM) of proteins. There is evidence of the importance of protein acetylation in the working of cells where they affect ATM gene functioning (Doss & Rajith, 2012).
The article utilizes fundamental tools that incorporate both sequence plus structure in order to ensure reliability of end results. Through this criterion, it is possible to forecast the action of non functional SNPs where various algorithms are in use.
In order to attain accurate results, the ranking system enabled determination of protein function by utilizing SNPs. The ranking was possible through the use of scores from distinct systems (Doss & Rajith, 2012). In order to reveal the sites for PTM, certain methods, for example, recognition of physical plus chemical properties were evident in the article.
The statistical analysis performed to determine the functional effects SNPs in ATM provided significant findings on SNPs and ATM genes relationships. Refining the SNPs was vital in determining the variation of DNA and thus revealed the existence of disease. The frequent occurrence of SNPs is vital in conducting studies whose purpose is to indicate vulnerability for disease attack (Reiner, et al., 2011).
Results on the forecast of deleterious effects of non identical SNPs in the coding area indicated 25, 69 and 67 percent to be deleterious. In this prediction, about 168 non synonymous SNPs were in use with the incorporation of SIFT and POLYPHEN phenomenon. Examination of functional SNPs occurring in the regulatory area offered a comparison of the practical elements and functional significance in line with each sequence (Doss & Rajith, 2012).
In the process of determining the impact of SNPs on the working of proteins, it was evident that, for every 168 SNPs, there were 36 non synonymous SNPs which appeared to destroy splicing. Analysis of functional effects of nsSNPs on protein indicated accuracy while using POLYPHEN and SIFTS methods (Doss & Rajith, 2012).
References
Doss, C., & Rajith, B. B. (2012). Computational Refinement of Functional Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Associated with ATM Gene. Plos ONE, 7(4), 1-11. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0034573
Reiner, A. P., Lettre, G., Nalls, M. A., Ganesh, S. K., Mathias, R., Austin, M. A., & … Kubo, M. (2011). Genome-Wide Association Study of White Blood Cell Count in 16,388 African Americans: the Continental Origins and Genetic Epidemiology Network (COGENT). Plos Genetics, 7(6), 1-14. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1002108
Scientific researches involving genetic advancements should be within the required ethical standards and promote human development endeavors. Besides generating important therapies, genetic modifications should also involve the formations of new living organisms that are of critical significance in developing human life (Denning and Priddle 8). In spite of the achievements realized due to genetic testing and progress, a number of concerns have been raised.
Moreover, the manner in which ethical principles and moral system affect genetic researches has remained a matter of debate. In this regard, the genetic experimentation should only be applied where it benefits the human development. Even though many people would argue against the genetic development and research, the benefits of the scientific advancement to the human development is immense.
The reasons why genetic experiments and developments should be encouraged within the moral conducts
Essentially, the genetic research and development should be limited to the areas that befit human endeavor. In addition, the extent in which genetic research and development should be undertaken must remain within ethical values and principles that uphold the sanctity of human life. As such, genetic engineering activities that tend to be contrary to the principles of human life and ethical values should be discouraged (Gottweis 91).
Bioethical issues that touch on the topic of human embryonic stem cells as well as cloning have been major concerns around the world thereby sparking fierce debates on such researches in the recent years. As indicated, human cloning and stem cell should be within the precincts of enhancing human developments.
The development of various tissues through cloning has often formed the cornerstone of stem cell researchers’ postulations. Based on this development, stem cells have attributes that ease advancements of genetic production processes. In essence, the developed stem cells have the capability of helping in the restructuring of broken tissues or replacing the dead tissues.
Further, the stem cells are critical in alleviating dangerous diseases from human beings. Researchers in the field prefer the use of adult stem cells as opposed to the application of embryonic cells while developing therapies as well as critical tissues used in the replacement and restructuring of dead and broken tissues respectively. Based on this argument, the elimination of genetic studies pertaining to human embryos is inevitable (Thiroux and Krasemann 207).
In reality, studies that do not lead to the destruction of cells have been encouraged. In this regard, the proponents of genetic engineering involving cell restructuring assert that increased treatments to previously incurable lethal ailments have been achieved due to genetic reformation. Besides, with the application of contemporary genetic therapeutic technologies, diseases that cause side-disparaging effects to the cells have been eliminated.
Conversely, embryonic stem cells researches involving the utilization of human embryos are considered the most unethical. The reason is that embryonic stem cells often hinder the efficient operations of the body cells. Further, donors of the embryos used in the stem cells researches often suffer gradual tissue impairments.
Available data contend that studies involving embryonic stem cells and genetic experiments as well as developments lead to the destruction of embryos and towering frequencies of embryo deaths (Thiroux and Krasemann 207).
Human cloning is one of the genetic researches and development that should be discouraged. However, cloning involving other organisms particularly for the development and manufacture of various products helpful to human development should be encouraged. Cloning is asexual processes in which new genetic characteristics of living organisms are developed.
For example, blending the somatic cells and oocytes of males and females organisms correspondingly gives rise to an individual with unique attributes. In other words, the electro-fusion of the gametes and the body cells generates differing and superior individual characteristics critical in improving productivity (Thiroux and Krasemann 207). Therefore, cloning of plants and animals that result in improved outcome for the betterment of human life should be encouraged.
On the contrary, scientific researches aimed at increasing agricultural productivity and health have continuously received acceptance by the majority. In such researches, the nuclear transfer exclusively generates the embryos entirely used in studies. Moreover, the cloning process does not require the female uterus for the embryos to develop.
Essentially, embryos developed through cloning for research purposes have increased benefits. One of the areas where cloning for research purposes has achieved much is in the field of medicine. In fact, most current therapies used to treat diseases that require tissue replacement or reconstruction are based on genetic researches and development (Gottweis 98).
Genetic experimentations on humans including cloning have been highly discouraged. In other words, majority consider interfering with normal existence of human life in any way including scientific research and development as unethical. As such, modifying human characteristic through genetic experimentation has attracted immense disapproval.
Therefore, human cloning for reproductive purposes should not be allowed. As indicated, expected offspring will face moral problems particularly their acceptance in the society (Denning and Priddle 8). Besides moral considerations, the evidence that human cloning will be successful is limited.
In addition, cloned organisms have numerous defects that have greater effects on the growth and development of the organism. In most cases, the defects lead to death of the organism. In fact, most malfunctions in plants and animals are blamed on mutations resulting from duplications of the organism’ DNA.
Most of the current crops and livestock result from genetically engineered activities. Such genetically modified animals and crops have various defects ranging from poor developments of major organs to lack of adaptation to the current environmental conditions. Due to such difficulties and challenges observed in animals and organisms, human gene modification is highly discouraged (Denning and Priddle 8).
In fact, many people disapprove cloning or genetic researches that involve the development of human beings through scientific processes. From the perspective of genetic engineering, the body cells are considered gametes since the cells are fused and then allowed to multiply through cell division.
The process is similar to the production of new distinct organism as observed in asexual reproduction (Gottweis 97). Producing humans in the lab is considered immoral by almost all societies. What makes such scientific actions immoral is the fear of creating genetic engineered offspring, which can be used as assets. Moreover, the offspring are not given equal status to the rest of the people in the society.
Ethical view asserts that all individuals including the embryos have a right to life and any processes that interfere with existence of the embryo are immoral. Moreover, the viewpoint of prolife is that the right to life begins at conception (Denning and Priddle 8). The meaning is that the embryos should be given equal status to that of an adult. Considering the two viewpoints, the morality of using the embryos for research purposes is questioned. The prolife assertions are also considered when birth control measures are undertaken.
Besides, the destruction of embryos means the end of life. In other words, human existence is under threat when the embryos are used for genetic researches and development (Gottweis 97).
However, the opposing views argue that the embryos cannot be identified before the lapse of fourteen days. As such, stem cells researches can be conducted using the embryos at that stage. Even though the stem cells researches can be undertaken using the embryos at that stage, the developed organisms have major defects that decrease the chance of survival.
Genetic experimentation and development are costly undertakings. Therefore, the results of the experiments are not always perfect. Moreover, clinical side effects resulting from such experiments prevent the practicality of the outcome on human beings (Denning and Priddle 8).
The high costs involved in the process and the side effects make the treatments resulting from genetic experimentation inaccessible to many people. Moreover, genetic experimentations including cloning require living body cells and the retrieval of such cells normally require extreme care. Besides, the cloned body cells present numerous health concerns to the patients
Conclusion
Ethical considerations are critical in all activities involving genetic modifications. Besides, all the genetic modifications and activities that result in enhancing human life should be encouraged. In other words, genetic modifications that result in increased productivity as well as advancing therapies should be encouraged. Essentially, the pursuit of genetic development and experimentation should be within the required ethical standards and promote human development endeavors.
Works Cited
Denning, Chris and Helen Priddle. “New frontiers in gene targeting and cloning: success, application and challenges in domestic animals and human embryonic stem cells.” Reproduction, 12.6 (2003): 1-11. Print.
Gottweis, Herbert. Governing molecules: the discursive politics of genetic engineering in Europe and the United States. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2008. Print.
Thiroux, Jacques and Keith Krasemann. Ethics: Theory and Practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2011. Print.
Human genome is a contemporary scientific revolution that seeks to find the cure for serious human diseases. For many years, incurable diseases have killed many people, but the new discoveries in the cure for these diseases have given hope to those who are suffering from incurable diseases.
Human Genome sciences mainly seek to find new therapeutic ways of treating those deadly diseases that prove to be fatal and improve the chances of survival for many hopeless patients. This scientific project usually involves the application of DNA sequence to develop certain types of protein combined with anti-body drug.
Since its discovery in 1992, human genome project has gained success within the field of biopharmaceutical industry by discovering various treatment drugs for cancer, HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C, rheumatoid arthritis and other incurable diseases. Already, the clinical trials have proven to be successful and this industry is growing daily in spite of the serious implications that accompanies it. The genome research has provided many social and economic benefits to the society today.
The Human Genome project and its revolutionary insight to the genetic blue print of the human body
The human genome project is a scientific application of biotechnology to develop pharmaceuticals by identifying the problematic proteins in the body. Some of these proteins may have defects; some may be in excess or may also be totally absent from the body. Therefore, the technology is used to engineer the protein or similar molecules to repair the problems in the body (Gad, 2007 & Cantor & Smith, 1999).
Although, the human genome project promises a revolutionary insight to the genetic blue print of the human beings, its application has raised some serious social, ethical, and economic implications. This paper will consider the social, ethical, and economic implications that have emerged from the application of this project. The paper also seeks to discuss its relationship to the broader context of genetic engineering and its applications by examining the application of frank stein metaphor and its potentiality for genetic engineering.
Genome is a general term that includes the entire DNA organism and the genes that store and transmit all the proteins that are used therein. It is the proteins stored therein that decide the general component and behavior of the organism and its ability to fight against viral infection (Barnes & Dupre, 2008).
For many years, scientists have attempted to find the therapeutic solution to the incurable diseases that continue to kill many people around the world. However, in 1992, a breakthrough was found in human genome project (Barnes & Dupre, 2008).
Toriello (2003) explains that it is the decoding of the mollecular arrangement in the chromosomes, part of the reproductive cells, which is mostly found in human body. Scientists and doctors believe that human genome is the genetic blue print that forms the core elements of the physical and behavioral traits of every human individual. These traits are passed through inheritance to their offspring (Toriello, 2003).
One of the main goals of human genome project is to undertake research into the genetic makeup of non-human species, especially laboratory mouse, fruit fly and many others (Cantor & Smith, 1999). The DNA variations of human beings is what is being used by scientists to diagnose, treat and somewhat prevent various diseases and disorders that affects human beings. Scientists also use DNA to determine individual’s biological make up, natural abilities and how to solve challenges that face human reproduction, food production, environmental effects, health care and social welfare (Murray, 1996).
However, Human genome project does not operate in isolation, but involves other scientific disciplines like genetic engineering, molecular biology, eugenics, biochemistry, and bio-pharmacology (Cantor & Smith, 1999). Cooper states that the aim of the human genome project is to identify and learn the sequences of the thousands of genes or DNA that mostly determine the characteristics and development of phenotype (Cooper, 1994).
Scientists have discovered that the solution lies with the scaling and purification of antibodies. Therefore, in conjunction with biopharmaceutical companies, they employed the use of commercial proteins for treating human diseases (Gottschalk, 2009).The antibodies are commercially produced in large scale in the laboratories by involving cultured cells from mammal tissues, which are then grown in a safe environment to produce human drugs.
The process of purifying these antibodies to produce proteins from mammals like mice have not just faced many challenges, but also raised many questions as well as raising many serious implications. Today, these therapeutic antibodies are widely available in the clinical markets around the world (Gottschalk, 2009).
Although, genetics has become an important part of medical practice and treatment, its implementation has not only made an impact on health care, but also raised many ethical implications (Murray, 1996). Murray also argued that it has reinvented the new meaning of the relationship between patients and physicians thus, revolutionizing the ‘social institutions, legal provisions and economic arrangements’ of this relationship ( Murray 1996:17).
Some of the ethical implications of genetic research touches on informed consent , privacy and confidentiality. It is imperative that all the research subjects or participants have been informed and their consent obtained before any research has been done on them. The subjects also need to be fully prepared before and have been educated on the risks and benefits of research process.
Generally, there are possibilities of psychosocial risks that may arise such as stigma, guilt, identity crisis and false results that may adversely affect the patient. It is important that all the participants are reassured and their confidential information and identity maintained.
Having an access to and disclosure of genetic information are other factors that must be addressed appropriately. Additionally, the researchers also need to give or lay down clear procedures on how to collect the genetic samples and how to conduct the research (Boon, 2002).
Furthermore, the process and procedure for collecting and storing the research samples such as blood, tissue, saliva and other kinds of body fluids for future must be properly done. To obtain such information, one needs to follow the proper channel. Such a research may affect children most compared to adults. Children who take part in such a research may face possible long-term consequences like social stigma and or even institutional discrimination (Boon, 2002).
Genetic research raises the question determining the sexual orientation. Lone (1999) argues that the use of genetic research to determine the sexual behaviors and orientation may have serious controversies and consequences in the family. For instance, the information may be used to harm the unborn children who may have homosexual orientation and those who are born may be forced to seek medical treatment or discriminated against. Moreover, it may lead couples to choose the sex of the child they want to have leading to abortions.
Unfortunately, genetic research and information can be used negatively, to discriminate people who are perceived to have some form of mental disorders, unintelligent or with physical defects or those of different races leading to what are referred to as Eugenics or racial purity (Barnes & Dupre, 2008).
In fact, some writers even argue that genome project is a result of Eugenic sequence, which was performed to control the human populations. Eugenics is a scientific study for depopulation of human species by controlling the reproduction of people perceived to have defects or presumed to suffer from undesirable inheritable characters.
This may include people suffering from mental or physical disorders or disabilities (Smoller et al, 2008). This may have serious social and political implications if used in Nazi style to control the population (Lioyd, 2008, p. 57). In a way, it may result to another holocaust or ethnic cleansing.
Genetic Engineering includes factors such as gene cloning, gene therapy, gene manipulation, gene modification, and recombinant DNA technology. The genetic research has also been used to study the brain stem cells thus leading to revolutionary treatment of mental diseases and psychotic disorders. However, the manner in which this research is conducted on animals and then tested on human beings is believed to have led the patients to drug abuse.
Scientists therefore apply medical technology to identify the gene variations and separate the chromosomes connected to different or same species. The moral objection of this practice raises the question of manipulation of human genome, seen by the religious circles as playing God. The debate over genetic engineering has heated up since 1980s touching on the theories of evolution, sexuality, gender and philosophy of biology (Lioyd, 2008).
However, the emergence and development of genetic engineering in the modern age mirrors the horrors of Frankenstein myth and fictions on embryonic research. According to Mulkay (1996, 157), the genetic research is a realization of “Frankenstein dream of systematic, science based control over the control over the creation of human beings”, being practiced today in fertility clinics. Although, Frankenstein was dubbed as a mad scientist, his predictions about human manipulations through human genome project are fulfilled.
From business perspectives, genome research and genetic treatment has attracted huge financial incentives. Many people are now turning focus on this therapy to solve their diseases. It is continuing to promise big financial pay offs, from genetically produced products continuing to change the lives of many people around the world. There have been massive development and expansion of biotechnological research and production with great financial rewards. This technology does not only deal with therapeutic advancement but also with agricultural production (Sulston & Ferry, 2002).
Genetic engineering has revolutionized and improved human survival who are somewhat threatened by drought, famine and other environmental disasters. This method is being used for sustainable agriculture in famine prone countries for commercial purposes in large scale. Genetic engineering has also improved human lives, especially life expectancy by treating the diseases that were considered incurable. Economically, it has provided millions with job opportunities in research institutions, clinics, and pharmaceutical companies.
Conclusion
This paper has examined the social, ethical, and economic implications of human genome project for the society and its potential for applications of the genetic research. It has looked at the arguments surrounding the genetic engineering and its applications to human beings.
Largely, it has established that evolution of genetic engineering and its application in human life in areas such as IVY and embryonic treatment, which are largely popular, were predicted in Frankstein horror movies. For many years, scientists and Doctors tried in vain the cure and therapeutic solution for incurable diseases and disorders including HIV /AIDS, diabetes, and cancer.
However, the breakthrough has only come through the genetic research of which genome project plays a big part. Although, this genome research is hugely popular, its application and implementation has raised serious socio-economic, political, legal, and ethical implications. Some of the problems associated with this practice, includes eugenics that is the method of controlling human population, which somehow, has led to ethnic cleansing like the Nazi style.
The other problems include the prediction of child sexual orientation and other disorders or defects before. This may lead to termination or discrimination of children who are considered undesirable or undeserving. Nevertheless, genetic research has become a multibillion-dollar income, with many people turning to it for treatment and food production.
Both the pharmaceutical companies and bio technological research centers are making huge money out of this project. Genetic research has also improved human lives and survival through genetically modified food, IVF treatment giving hope to infertile men and women who could not have babies.
More importantly, it has offered much the chance to survive some of the incurable diseases and given a longer life expectancy. Above all, it has given many, the hope of employment opportunities. There are many people who are now employed in genome research institutions, clinics and pharmaceutical industries.
Bibliography
Barnes, B., & Dupre, J., 2008. Genomes and what to make of them. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
Boon, K. A., 2002. The human genome project: what does decoding DNA mean for us? Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow Publishers.
Cantor, C. R., & Smith, C. L., 1999. Genomics: the science and technology behind the human genome project. New York: John Wiley.
Cooper, N. G., 1994. The human genome project: deciphering the blueprint of heredity. Mill Valley, Calif: Univ. Science Books.
Gad, S. C., 2007. Handbook of pharmaceutical biotechnology. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley.
Gottschalk, U., 2009. Process scale purification of antibodies. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons.
Lioyd, E.A., 2008. Science, Politics, and Evolution. Leiden: Cambridge University Press.
Lone, D.L., 1999. “Whose genes are they? The Human Genome Diversity Project”. J Health Soc Policy 10 (4): 51–66.
Mulkay, M., 1996. “Frankestein and the Debate over embryo research”. In Science, Technology & Human Values 21(2): 157-176.
Murray, T. H., 1996. The human genome project and the future of health care. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.
Smoller, J. W., Sheidley, B. R., & Tsuang, M. T., 2008. Psychiatric genetics: applications in clinical practice. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub.
Sulston, J., & Ferry, G., 2002. The common thread a story of science, politics, ethics, and the human genome. Washington, D.C: Joseph Henry Press.
Toriello, J., 2003. The Human Genome Project. New York: Rosen Pub. Group.
There is a lot of controversy attached to the idea of human cloning. For some people, human cloning is ‘ethically wrong’ and for others, it is a ‘repugnant’ and’ morally despicable’ practice. There are various potential benefits attributed to cloning. Emerging testimonies on human cloning have elicited mixed feelings on whether its potential benefits warrant the possible horrors.
There are those who agree that initial attempts to clone people could result in such horrific consequences as deformed children, spontaneous abortion, as well as putting the lives of women who volunteer to carry the first abortions in grave danger (Gibbs 4).
In addition, cloning is also associated with a number of disadvantages such as the disappearance of the meaning of life. We also have social, ethical, moral, political, and legal issues associated with the practice of cloning (Loston 1). The current paper is an attempt to explore social, ethical, and moral issues of cloning.
Human cloning is believed to enhance scientific development and scientific knowledge of humans. For example, the study of human cloning may lead to the discovery of a cure for such diseases as cancer and Alzheimer’s. Another benefit of human cloning is the ability to “grow” new livers, new hearts, and nerve cells.
Moreover, human cloning may also allow for the rebirth of deceased humans, the discovery of new ideas and data, and a cure for genetics-related diseases (Gibbs 6). On the other hand, it is not clear yet the nature of the risks that human clones would face as they develop. Human cloning could result in superhuman beings and who knows their longevity compared to the rest of us? Human cloning can also lead to healthier beings.
In addition, it can also help shed light on the causes of spontaneous abortions, and a host of cancers. In contrast, conducting human clones may still be an unsafe practice considering the many risks and uncertainties associated with it. As Cohen (para. 2) has noted, human cloning can cause more deaths of human beings since both, the embryo and the child, can be in danger.
I believe the idea of human cloning is wrong from a socialist perspective because we would literary be helping God in his work. The fact that God created us in his own image and likeness means that we should follow his commands, and not be co-creators with him. Considering that life is normally given to us freely, human cloning would be nothing short of mocking God.
It would also be a mockery of human kind because essentially, the socialization process of a human clone may be faced with resistance from the rest of us since this is something that we are not accustomed to. Moreover, the idea of human cloning has not been accepted by society in general, and as such, we can expect one form of resistance or another.
On the other hand, one might still argue that cloning is a purely individual decision and because we have that freedom, we might go ahead and embrace this practice as well. Other people also see human cloning as a gambling act whereby we may be intending to treat a preexisting medical condition such as Alzheimer’s cancer, or Parkinson’s disease. From such a perspective, human cloning may no longer be seen as an ethical issue but as a medical issue.
For the larger majority, we want to play it safe when it comes to the practice of human cloning. Accordingly, we are yet to take a stand on whether the possible benefits of human cloning would justify the potential horrors associated with the condition. We feel that scientists are leading us to an unknown world. As such, our moral may be compromised by undertaking the practice of human cloning.
From a moral point of view, human cloning is wrong because when undertaking the experiments, we are likely to put the would-be clones in unnecessary danger. Because human clones are not generally accepted in the society, it would be morally wrong to bring forth a child who would be denied sufficient psychological and physical support.
There is the possibility of lack of attachment between a mother and a child in the case of a cloned child. Just as some people have found, the practice of animal cloning as unacceptable, we can also expect a lot of concern when it comes to human cloning. The larger majority is opposed to the idea of human cloning because they see it as a morally unacceptable practice. As such, it is currently inappropriate, not to mention unethical and morally wrong to undertake human cloning.
The possibility that cloning of human might one day become a reality has elicited a lot of ethical issues. Already, there appears to be high failure rates for animal cloning and for this reason, we need to be very afraid because we may be destined to a similar high failure pattern when and if we decide to embrace the idea of human cloning. This means that we also have to contend with the high morbidity rates that characterize cloned animals (Loston para. 4).
Cloning among animals has also been faced with high disability and deformity rates. For example, owing to disability, Dolly the sheep had to be put down when she was only 6 years old, although many sheep live to be over 10 years old. Although we might be able to overcome such coning problems over time, nonetheless, the associated ethical ramifications are not that easy. What would be the basis for denying couples to reproduce cloned babies? Whether cloning should be a preserve for homosexual couples or sterile couples, is still debatable.
There question of parents having to choose the traits of their children (because this is what cloning entails anyway), does not appears to go down well with a lot of people. If we allow human cloning to happen, then we shall have effectively started an inevitable process of phasing out the human identity as we know it today. The issue of individuality also comes into question, as well as the difference between manufacture and procreation. If we allowed human cloning to take place, how would the different generations relate?
Conclusion
Research indicates that cloning has a very low success rate. Even if we are in a position to increase the success rate of human cloning, we cannot rule out the possibility of problem developing during the cloning process, before, during, or after pregnancy. In spite of such risks, proponents of human reproductive cloning views the technique as a potential solution to infertility problems.
There are moral, ethical and social issues attached to the debate on human cloning. As such, policy makers, the public and researchers should all have a responsibility to assess the possible effects of human cloning technique on humans in order to make more informed decisions.
In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is a successful treatment for purposes of infertility and in couples who are in need of Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) so as to assess genetic abnormalities of their potential offspring. These two procedures can also be used by couples who do not have fertility problems.
In these instances, IVF and PGD are used as a form of assisted reproductive technology to guide the couples in selection of the offspring they intend to conceive based on the sex. Sex selection of an offspring may be due to preference or it may be because the couple is selecting a sex that does not have sex-linked genes (Elder, 2008, p52).
For instance, some genetic diseases are sex-linked, for example, Duchenne muscular dystrophy which affects boys but not girls (girls are only carriers of the disorder). In these cases, cells derived via IVF are analyzed so as to determine the sex of the embryo. In case male embryos have the sex-linked condition, only the female ones are implanted.
However, it is important for couples that decide to use these assisted reproductive methods to understand the risks, benefits, complications and challenges of the procedures and to decide whether the risks are worth taking so as to create gender balance in their family. The success rate of these procedures depends upon many factors like age of the woman and the physiological/health condition of the couples (Harper, 2009, p56).
Risks of PDG and IVF
Risks for PGD and IVF in sex selection procedures may be classified as; general risks, disorders in pregnancy outcome, risks to do with infant mortality and morbidity, and risks concerning imprinting disorders. Healthcare experts need to define the nature of the risks well because they determine the success rate of the procedures.
Some potential risks are extremely dangerous and they, hence, necessitate health care experts to abandon the procedure. However, some risks are worth taking if the couple is really intent on the sex selection exercise.
General risks and complications of PGD treatment are identical to those of IVF since the procedures depend on each other. Some potential risks for IVF are drug reactions, multiple births, ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS), and ectopic pregnancy (Tursi, 2008, p67).
Drug reaction
A good number of women have some form of reaction to the IVF drugs; this is manifested as hot flushes, irritability, headaches, restlessness, lethargy, nausea, vomiting, shortness of breath, abdominal bloating(due to excess fluid accumulation), abdominal pain and swelling and ovarian hypertrophy. Most of these side effects are mild and should not cause much alarm, hence, are considered as general risks.
Abdominal pain and swelling is as a result of ovarian hyper-stimulation in response to the injected gonadotrophins. Women who have these symptoms need to see a doctor urgently especially when there is abdominal pain and swelling (Center, 2009, p79).
Multiple births and birth complications
Placement of more than one embryo in the womb enhances the likelihood of a couple having twins or even triplets. This is not a bad thing, but, it increases complications for the pregnant woman and the embryo. Multiple pregnancies elevate the blood pressure of the woman and increase the risk of developing diabetes during the pregnancy period.
Statistics in the UK reveal that more than half of twins and 90% of triplet are prematurely born or are born with a subpar standard birth weight. Hence, this increases infant mortality and morbidity rates.
This is because it has been documented that the risk of an infant dying during the first week is about five times higher for the case of twins than when it is a single baby. For triplets, this is even worse, rising by about 9 times (Harper, 2009, p98).
Ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome
This complication is rare in IVF procedures, but couples considering the procedure need to have this in mind. For highly sensitive women to the IVF drugs that are taken to enhance production of many eggs, too many eggs are produced in the ovaries which cause ovarian hypertrophy. The ovaries become very large and extremely painful. Women below 30 years are more likely to develop these complications during pregnancy.
Women who have polycystic ovary syndrome also have a higher probability of developing ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome. Other symptoms are nausea, abdominal bloating and vomiting. Severe cases are dangerous since they complicate the pregnancy (Sutcliffe, 2009, p89).
Ectopic pregnancy
Having IVF increases the risk of developing an ectopic pregnancy whereby the implanted embryo will attach itself along the walls of the fallopian tube. This complicates the pregnancy due to retroperitoneal bleeding (bleeding into the abdomen) and vaginal bleeding. Ectopic pregnancies are very dangerous since extreme bleeding can cause hemorrhagic shock which is a cause of acute death.
Other complications and risks
Pelvic infections may also occur in some cases of egg collection, and in some cases, abscess formation also occurs. Even if the procedure is carried under sterile conditions, sometimes it is almost impossible to prevent infections.
Pelvic infections manifest with pain in the lower abdomen, red vaginal bleeding, diarrhea, fever and general malaise. The needle may also puncture the small bowel and the adjoining abdominal vessels. However, the bleeding can be stopped through pressure application at the injured site (Verlinsky, 2008, 78).
Ethical considerations of sex selection
Even though some methods for sex selection have been approved by various medical societies, ethical issues continue arising concerning the morality and nature of the process. Sperm sorting has been criticized by various groups and medical societies.
Sperm sorting involves sorting sperms based on the type of chromosome. This is of help to couples who are undertaking sex selection but most people feel that it is unethical to choose the type of sperm for fertilization.
Other people also argue that it is extremely unethical to disregard and discard babies simply because genetic conditions have been implicated in their chromosomes. To others also, it is unethical to create very many embryos so as to increase the chances of fertilization. Most of these extra embryos are unnecessary and are seen as wasteful.
Regardless of these ethical considerations, sex selection is a decision of a couple who decide what is good for their families especially since it causes gender balance. The couple should not be concerned about what other people in society feel as long as they understand the benefits it would bring to them.
Nobody has a right to decide what is acceptable or not. Gender selection is anyone’s fundamental right and if one decides to do it, they should go ahead (Kehoe, 2009, p97)
Factors that contribute to wanting gender selection
The motivation of desiring gender selection is the desire by couples to have a gender balanced family. For example, a couple may feel that they have many boys than girls, and they may, hence, decide to undertake gender selection so that there is an equal number of boys and girls in their family.
This is every couple’s preference; while some couples do not mind the sex of their children, some treasure some sexes as compared to others. As a result of this they decide to create gender equality.
Secondly, a couple may not want to pass undesirable traits to their offspring especially sex linked traits like haemophilia A and Duchene muscular dystrophy. These traits are deadly and, hence, a couple may decide to give birth to health children alone.
References
Center, G. P. , 2006. PGD: preimplantation genetic diagnosis : a discussion of challenges, concerns, and preliminary policy options related to the genetic testing of human embryos. New York: Genetics and Public Policy Center.
Joyce C. Harper, J. D., 2009. Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
Kay Elder, B. D. , 2008. In-Vitro Fertilization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sarah A. Tursi Msw, S. A. , 2008. Ivf: The Wayward Stork: What to Expect, Who to Expect It From, and Surviving It All. New York: iUniverse.
Sean Kehoe, L. C., 2008. Reproductive genetics. London: RCOG.
Steven R. Bayer, M. M., 2007. The Boston IVF handbook of infertility: a practical guide for practitioners who care for infertile couples. New York: Informa Healthcare.
Sutcliffe, A. G., 2009. IVF children: the first generation : assisted reproduction and child development. New York: Parthenon Pub. Group.
Yury Verlinsky, A. K., 2008. Atlas of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. London: Taylor & Francis.
Not only is privacy definition absent in the legislation that controls and amends an individual privacy privilege but also in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982). Nevertheless, privacy is a basic human right.
It is a significant factor of a democratic society; it is ‘at the heart of liberty in modern state.’ Some people describe it as a private field of thoughts and response that is essential for freedom of ideas, speech, and conscience, among others (Delisle, 2003).
Privacy is entitlement to a state of lack of interference or intrusion. This concept possesses four dimensions, including; (a) bodily privacy, (b) territorial privacy, (c) communication privacy and, (e) information privacy. Majority of privacy policies is inclined towards information privacy.
This legislation focuses on the collection, application, availability and amendment of delicate information. Privacy can also be defined as the privilege to restrict access to own personal information as well as to one’s person (Stoddart, 2005).
Genetic testing refers to various techniques used for testing an individual genetic make-up and to establishing the presence of inborn genetic characteristics or environmentally induced gene mutation. Two modes of test could be applied at a workplace, including genetic monitoring, and genetic screening.
Genetic monitoring is a regularly performed test which considers environmental hazards at the workplace that may influence an employees DNA. On the other hand, genetic screening concerns analysis of the inherent genetic composition of a person to determine specific inborn characteristics or abnormalities. As opposed to genetic monitoring this analysis requires only one test.
Concerns
Genetic testing provokes various concerns form privacy activists. An individual’s genetic make-up is not subject to change, unlike his or her name, credit card and bank account.
In a workplace context, genetic testing is associated with the most obvious intrusion of privacy within the aspects of job insurance coverage and promotion. Genetic screening reveals confidential information about the employee and relatives since genetic information carries facts concerning ancestors and children.
Certain abnormalities are hereditary, so that by associating the worker with a genetic abnormality translates to association of the employee’s relations with the disorder. Essentially this practice passes as an intrusion of a worker’s privacy, wherein the data is collected, and used or revealed devoid of their informed consent. In fact, the concerns pertaining to informed consent genetic data collection are yet to be settled.
Legislation
Absence of uniformity within regional legislation impedes identification of privacy responsibilities with respect to genetic data. In the context of the Canadian legislation, there are prominent loopholes concerning the genetic data collection and application, given the variation in certain significant laws across the provinces.
For instance, genetic privacy in the employer-employee setting is supported in B.C., Quebec and Alberta presently while it is not supported in the rest of the provinces. Therefore, in the provinces that have not yet installed the legislation, this aspect of privacy concern is rendered uncertain and the workers are provided with insufficient instructions in approaching genetic data collection in Canada.
Requirements
Some insight may be obtained from judicial appraisal that has been based on the context of the use of Criminal Code to genetic databases. Genetic database systems enable authorities to preserve DNA information just from offenders convicted of specific grievous offenses, under a judge’s permission (LaForest, 1985). The restrictions enforced in the criminal setting highlights the significance of the concern of genetic data collection.
Noteworthy, the united states Congress have in the past few years worked on the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act and approximately 40 U.S. states have legislation controlling the application of genetic information. Huge United State’s organizations operational in Canada have also express concern for this issue.
Reference List
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (1982). Part I of the Constitution Act.
Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11.
Dickson, G. R., & Barreth, S. (2006). Privacy laws and virtue testing in the workplace. Hamilton Street, Regina.
Delisle J. (2003). GOL – OCRI Series. Ottawa, Ontario; Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation. Web.
LaForest. (1985). supra note 70 at 9: referring to Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, ss. 487.04-487.092.
Stoddart. (2005). Role and Operations of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Standing Senate Committee on National Finance. Ottawa, Ontario.
Genetic experimentation and development have the prospect of initiating a number of alterations as well as benefits to the human being. In addition, the genetic developments have the ability of creating new living things, prevent emission of toxic wastes as well as provide cure to various ailments.
Further, through the utilization of genetic tools, modification of individual attributes is possible. The paper presents the shortcomings as well as the gains achieved through genetic development and experimentation. Moreover, the paper spells out how the ethical principles and moral system are affected by the genetic engineering. In this regard, the study will set limits where genetic development and experimentation should reach.
Discussions about the extents of genetic development and experimentation
Over the years, the global society has been involved in complicated debates on the bioethical concerns pertaining to the researches on human embryonic stem cells and human cloning. To begin with, the stem cells have the capability of forming assorted varieties of tissues. In this regard, the stem cells exhibit the quality of enabling development engineering that can aid in the reorganization of smashed up tissues and cure humans from lethal ailments.
Secondly, embryonic stem cells from the human embryos majorly involve the destructions of living embryos thus could jeopardize the smooth functioning of the body cells and causing impairments to the donors (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2007).
Generally, adult stem cells have played critical roles in curative undertakings compared to the embryonic stem cells due to their relative firmness. In other words, the utilization of the unstable embryonic stem cells is an ingredient for tumors. On the contrary, the versatile adult stem cells are effective in therapeutic purposes.
Researches on the embryonic stem cells have resulted into the destruction of embryos. Therefore, conducting researches that do not involve the destruction of cells needs immense support. However, this has attracted debate from diverse quarters with proponents and opponents of genetic engineering raising different concerns. The supporters of cell modification contend that there has been increased cure of dangerous diseases that were otherwise untreatable due to the genetic engineering.
In addition, through the application of modern genetic engineering as well as therapy technologies, devastating effects of cell diseases have been alleviated. On the other hand, the critics of genetic development argue that researches involving genetic experiments and development would lead to an escalating rate of embryo deaths (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2007).
Further, opponents claim that genetic development is an unethical experimentation motivated by the activities of the scientists from Germany in the era of Nazi.
Human cloning has also been at the centre of debate about genetic development and experimentation. In other words, using asexual processes in developing new genetic characteristics to living organisms has been a central issue. For instance, fusing the somatic cells of ewe to the oocytes of sheep respectively through electrofusion produces divergent, self-incorporated and new organism that has the same genetic characteristics as the parents (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2007).
Based on this development, other researchers contend that developing human beings is scientifically feasible through somatic cell nuclear transfer. In fact, the proponents of cloning assert that it would provide the parents with the opportunity of determining the attributes as well as the genetic features of the offspring. In addition, people who have no kids would be provided with the prospects of bearing children.
Moreover, the pain suffered from the loss of kids would be outdated since there is a chance of making the genetic duplicates of the deceased children. Conversely, the opponents of cloning reproduction of human beings are of the opinions that it is dehumanizing and thus has the ability of corroding culture thereby instigating the commoditization of human life (Schichor & Simonet, 2002).
In essence, through cloning, children are considered as products of manufacture that are made instead of begotten. The consideration compromises the offspring’s eccentricity and thus brings out ethical concerns pertaining to affinity, individuality as well as sense of self. Further, growing the genetic combinations to such extent aggravates the complexity among the kids because the anticipations of the parents promote ambiguous life among the offspring.
The extent of genetic engineering has initiated debate concerning live birth cloning as well as research cloning. In fact, genetic duplication of human beings for reproductive rationales has continuously attracted immense disapproval from the masses. People assert that genetic duplication of human beings is immoral test on the expected children (Schichor & Simonet, 2002). Studies show that only about two percent of the genetic experimentation is accomplished.
Genetic copying leads to numerous fetal deaths and causes major disabilities as well as malformations among the cloned animals. For example, cloning hinders the achievement of the optimal developmental landmarks in cows by initiating heart and lung complications, pathological obesity in mice and severe arthritis in sheep. Concerning such problems suffered by the animals due to cloning, there has been increased opposition against reproductive cloning (Schichor & Simonet, 2002).
However, research cloning continues to receive approval among masses across the spectrum. In research cloning, the nuclear somatic cell transfer exclusively generates the embryos for research purposes. More importantly, the processes avoid implantation of embryo into female uterus thereby avoiding its advancement into a fetus and develop into a mature being.
The research cloning has significant benefits. In particular, the generation of medicines that are of inherent equivalence to patients has been attained because of the embryonic gene yields through research cloning (Gottweis, 1998). However, opponents of research cloning assert that the major aim of research gene copying is only to bring new beings into continuation and then kill them to obtain the body parts. Actually, the society allows bringing into life new individuals.
However, the public would not allow killing and destruction of human cells. In other words, reproductive cloning creates peculiar circumstances in the society’s state of affairs. As such, the extent of cloning should be limited to the development of new beings and not destruction or thrusting aside of any cells.
Many people contend that cloning, which involves genetic duplication should be banned. In fact, in the perspective of cloning, the somatic cells are comparable to the gametes and not to the embryos. Therefore, fusing the somatic cells to the gametes through the sexual reproduction produces new distinctive organisms (Gottweis, 1998). Further, larger percentage of the society considers cloning as ethically problematic since it surpasses numerous significant moral precincts.
For instance, cloning initiates a dehumanizing world of genetic engineered offspring as well as the habitual use of embryonic beings existing as sheer innate assets.
Actually, states such as the US, UK, Belgium, Cuba and Singapore prohibit cloning of embryos for either research or therapeutic purposes due to its dehumanizing effects. In addition, the United Nations continuously receives conventions from different nations such as Costa Rica and Belgium calling for the proscription of human cloning.
According to the diverse ethical opinions, the embryo has a right and moral rank to life at varied periods of existence. Just to begin with, the Catholic Church contends that at the point of conception, an individual acquires inclusive right to life. Therefore, destroying the embryonic cells is unethical and is considered as murder of blameless beings. In addition, the view contends that utilization of intrauterine devices that obliterate the embryo constitutes slaughter.
Secondly, several logicians contend that nothing subsists after cell divisions. In this regard, the destruction of the embryo would lead to lack of existence (Gottweis, 1998). Thirdly, the consciousness view allows embryo experimentation for fourteen days after conception and it is considered moral in the United Kingdom.
However, the analysis faces a number of shortcomings, particularly; the genetic engineering of the embryo cells renders organisms unconscious thereby affecting the state of minds. Lastly, the potential view asserts that it is immoral to kill a potential individual through cloning of embryos and somatic cells.
Stem cell and cloning researches are accompanied by huge costs. As such, the researchers have not been successful (Gottweis, 1998). In other words, through experimentation and development of embryonic stem cells, teratomas and teracarcinomas develop in mice.
Further, clinical applications such as myocardial infarction and acute liver failure prohibit cloning of cells. Development of genes is only affordable to the wealthy hence labor intensive due to the personalized treatments. Moreover, cloning involves a huge number of oocytes from women and retrieval of the eggs presents health concerns to women (Gottweis, 1998). The experimentation of cells generates commercialization of eggs and embryos thus undermining the self-respect of women.
Conclusion
The pursuit of genetic development and experimentation has benefits and shortcomings. In fact, cloning has inestimable prospect of prolonging human life. However, the genetic engineering should be subjected to regular relations to prevent the potential risks with which it is associated.
References
Gottweis, H. (1998). Governing molecules: the discursive politics of genetic engineering in Europe and the United States. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Schichor, N., & Simonet, J. (2002). Should we allow genetic engineering? A public policy analysis of germline enhancement. Web.
Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W. (2007). Ethics theory and practice. Upper Saddle River, NY: Pearson.