Thanks to the advanced science and technology in modern times, scientists have created technology that has the ability to edit diseased genes in embryos.  Some diseases that this procedure could potentially cure are Huntington’s disease, cystic fibrosis, and could even potentially stop a form of inherited Alzheimers.  Though the research is still in its early stages, a substantial amount of research has shown that a technology called CRISPR could edit out diseased cells in embryos.  The downside to this procedure, however, is that it could also be used to alter the genes in embryos to have selected traits and genes selected individually by the parents.  Some of the genes that would be highly sought after are athleticism, intelligence, hair color, eye color, rhythm, etc.   Genetically Modifying embryos to cure genetic diseases has the potential to help many children and families; however, despite the benefits, it is probable that genetic modification could cause social and financial gaps within society and could potentially lead to negative impacts on health due to incomplete research and government limitation if modification is used to select favorable genes rather than just editing out genetic diseases.

Scientists have done a lot of research and tests to come up with a way to modify the genes in embryos and recently, they have done just that.  With a system called CRISPR or the “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat,” scientists are able to “make random or targeted modifications to genomic sequences” which allows scientists to “study the functions of genetic components and engineer organisms for research and practical applications” (Kang et al. 1).  This is a huge step towards genetic modification of embryos because scientists are better able to understand the cells, genes, and DNA in embryos.  If scientists are able to successfully edit gene sequences in embryos, they will eventually be able to edit out genes with inherited diseases like Huntington’s disease, sickle cell anemia, early onset Alzheimer’s and many more.  These are just some of the many different types of inherited diseases that affect people in many different ways.  Once these diseases are in a family sequence, they are there to stay and will get passed on from generation to generation resulting in a large population of people affected by this disease.  Until now, there wasn’t much that scientists or doctors could do to stop or cure these inherited diseases.  The new CRISPR system “Allows specific sections of DNA to be altered or replaced” (“Associated Press”) which enables scientists to remove or edit genes with inherited diseases or unwanted traits.  Though scientists have not been able to successfully use this system on a human embryo because of incomplete research, it has successfully been tested on animals and it has been stated that humans are not far off.  Since inherited diseases are such a big issue in the world today, this system could prevent these diseases and prevent them from spreading through families.  According to Michael Le Page, CRISPR, the genome editing technique, has been tested as “a possible therapy for saving the sight of people with inherited eye diseases” (Le Page 1) which is yet another of the benefits of the CRISPR system.  Though research is not far enough along to use this system to successfully edit human genes, scientists predict that we are not far off.  

Now, this may sound like all good news; however, there are many risks to heath that have not been thought out.  If scientists can successfully edit and replace DNA in cells, the next step will be designer babies. Recent technologies have allowed for the “modification of singular embryos, meaning parents can alter the genes of an embryo to reflect certain desired qualities” (Ossareh 729) like hair color, eye color, and intelligence.  Many people believe that this would benefit society because humans would be able to perform many different tasks related to intelligence or physical ability at a higher level.    Though this system could be very beneficial, there are also many concerns.  One main concern is that at this stage of research, the system has not been fully carried out on a human embryo because of FDA restrictions limiting research, so there are many health and safety concerns.  In addition, there are social ethical concerns that a social gap will become more prominent in society.

The first and most prominent obstacle regarding genetic modification of embryos is the social and ethical issues that concern scientists and the general public. Though modification has potential to help stop inherited diseases, it also has potential to be abused.  If used the wrong way, society could very possibly see the first designer baby.  Paul Knoepfler, in his Ted Talk about “The Ethical Dilemma of Designer Babies” discusses the issues that may arise if the first designer baby is introduced.  Knoepfler uses In Vitro Fertilization as a comparison to genetic modification.  He states that In Vitro Fertilization became a mainstream procedure at a very fast pace.  He then compares this to designer babies stating that if in virto fertilization grew so quickly, then so will designer babies because of the increasing rate of advancements in technology and science. Knoepfler predicts that “within a few decades, there could well be millions of genetically modified humans” because of the way that in vitro fertilization took off at the rate that it did. Though that may not sound like such a bad thing, the impacts that designer babies would have on society would be astounding.  

The most prominent issue that would accompany genetically enhanced humans would be the widening social gap. Amy Harmon, a national correspondent for The New York Times, predicts that the genetic modification of embryos would lead to a “dystopian social divide between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot”.  This would be caused by the wealthy class in America having access to the procedure which would lead to the upper class not only having a wealth advantage but having a potential physical or intellectual advantage as well.  The affects that this gap would have on families and children would be astounding.  In school, the higher class would have even more access to education supplements and the school scene would become even more competitive not even giving the lower class a chance at success.  Families would also be impacted by the increasing social divide in several ways such as discrimination from the higher class, less opportunities in the job market, and lower access to healthcare and other necessary resources.  All of this would occur because enhanced humans are wealthier giving them access to healthcare, and are more equipped educationally, therefore, are first pics for higher paying jobs are the genetically enhanced humans.  

In addition to a wealth and social gap, if genetic modification becomes more mainstream, it “could lead to a widening of the health gap between the rich and poor, both within a society and between nations” (Ball).  The poor is already at a disadvantage because they have more limited access to healthcare than the wealthy.  If a genetically more superior class emerges, there will be less demand for healthcare in certain areas leading to even more scarce access to healthcare for the lower classes.  In addition to the health gap there are also health concerns associated with genetic modification that could have adverse effect on human embryos. In his book How to Build a Better Human: An Ethical Blueprint Gregory Pence discusses many ethical objections to genetic modification and designer babies.  One of the issues discussed is the idea that there are many potential health risks associated with genetic modification. One example of this is when “deleting the genes for Huntington’s, we might inadvertently give it cancer” (Pence 137).  In other words, if a diseased gene is edited out of an embryo, then another health condition could arise because of it.  If this were to happen, the mistake would permanently be placed in the genes and would get passed along from generation to generation making the benefits of the procedure not worth it.  Because of these issues and incomplete research, it would be dangerous to use this procedure because of the negative effects that it would have on not only one person, but many others.  

Other than ethical and health concerns, many aspects of genetic modification would not actually lead to superior performance or higher intelligence because of parenting styles and the potential that children may not want to pursue the talent that was predestined for them in the children’s genes.  Bonnie Steinbock, a bioethics professor at the University at Albany, brings up the point that if children’s genes are chosen for them, that the child would not have a say in what he would like to participate in.  For example, if a child was given “genes associated with musical ability, the child would be forced to be a musician, when maybe he or she would rather have been an athlete” (Steinbock).  Consequently, it is possible that children will not want to live up to their potential as a way of rebelling against what their parents wanted for them.  In addition, no matter what a child’s genetic makeup, if they don’t practice or work at their talent, they will not develop properly or live up to their potential.  If a child feels forced to work at something that they are genetically superior at, they will most likely be less willing to work at it.  Steinbock introduces the “hyper-parent” which she describes as a parent who “ignores the child’s own talents and abilities, and instead forces the child to do what will satisfy parental dreams and aspirations” which Steinbock explains would be the parents interested in genetic modification of embryos.  This is because the parents would be able to choose favorable traits like athleticism or rhythm to satisfy their dreams for their children.  The issue with that, however, is that the parents are choosing the child’s interests without the child’s consent.  As a result of this, children would be constrained and many possibilities would be out of reach.  In addition, many traits in children are a result of parenting styles and the way in which children were raised.  Just because a child has the genes to have a higher intelligence level or knowledge capacity doesn’t mean that the child will work hard in school or practice their talent.  

As a result of this research, the majority of scientists have concluded that though genetic modification has the potential to stop genetic diseases, there are still many dangerous factors associated with the system.  It is important that if genetic modification is used at all, it is only used as a way to edit out genetic diseases.  In all of the sources used in this essay, the authors have addressed their concerns with the procedures and have stated that they believe that at the current moment, the research and procedure should be focused on genetic diseases and that scientists should stay away from designer babies.  This is because of the potential social and societal that could arise if designer babies are to be created.  Though it seems as if many people would be in support of genetically enhancing humans, “83% [of Americans] believed it should be illegal to genetically enhance embryos to enhance such traits as intelligence or attractiveness” (Gale).  This goes to show that the potentially disastrous effects of this procedure are far from occurring because of lack of support from the government, the general population, and scientists.  Despite this, it is still important that people are educated about the negative effects because of the potential dangers.  
