janaisb
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#1
Hi, could I have some feedback on my essay please, it was completely done in timed conditions including planning. Any feedback would be amazing!


Over the last decade, the development in the knowledge regarding genetics has accelerated giving scientists the ability to modify DNA and therefore determine certain phenotypes of the offspring. The argument regarding parents power over this choice is a controversial one, given that on one hand it is their offspring and therefore they should have total power over it, however on the other hand it is the obligation of the state and developing scientists to ensure that this breakthrough is not misused and it's intended use is not abused by those that do not fully understand it's potential consequences.

On one hand, the scientific implications of sex determination are not fully known, and therefore this arguably selfish choice of the parents, could have life long or even life threatening effects on the child. Genetic modification for aesthetic purposes is morally wrong, you are changing and risking the life of an embryo for selfish, egoistic reasons. There is no need to determine the sex of a baby unless it was proven that it could avoid certain future health issues. What's more we also have to take into account the social impactions such science may have; The power to select the sex off the offspring could lead to further genetic modifications being socially acceptable and desirable (For example: eye colour, hair colour, height etc.), this would lead to what is knows as 'designer babies' - offspring in which multiple features have been artificially determined. This would generate a society in which appearance has even more of a central and dominating role that it currently does, there would be constant efforts and competition to have what is percieved as the perfect baby, whilst ultimately destroying the natural development of a human for the sole purpose of a certain sex or even a single feature. In addition certain social classes would be unable to afford such modifications, increasing social class divisions making them easily distinguishable physically, whilst placing the new generations of genetically modified children even higher on the social hierarchy.

However on the other hand, many scientists argue that although it is morally wrong, it is unlikely that the child will be seriously effected. However is this statement enough to take a risk on life? In addition is is proven that males are more likely to possess sex linked diseases including those such as colour blindness, therefore determing the sex of the offspring may in fact benefit the child's future and prevent them from having to live with a disease that there is a high possibility they will inherit and a method to prevent them doing so. Arguably knowing a child will be born with a disease without intervening is more morally wrong than changing the sex of said child.

Overall, I believe that unless there is proven evidence that having a child of one sex will be more likley to inherit a disease than the other sex, genetics should be left alone and only used in extreme circumstances. If we began to accept genetic modifying for physical attributes in one situation, people globally will begin to belive that their individual situations also deserve accepetance, which will then lead to future generation of 'designer babies'. Reinforcing my point, permitting genetic modification of gender would increase social divisions and make them even more noticeable given the high costs of the treatment. Despite being unaware of future developments and safety precautions, at this current time the side effects of genetic modification is not fully known, both scientifically where it could lead to genetic mutations and the loss of life, and socially in which it could result in a gender inbalance and social competition for the ideal offspring.
0
reply
Joleee
Badges: 18
#2
Report 6 months ago
#2
if you re-read your work, your argument is extremely one sided.

what is the argument in favour of genetic modification? can we prevent disease or make persons more intelligent? i know almost nothing of the subject but i don't think it's all about aesthetics.

i wouldn't utter the words 'morally wrong' in a law essay. morally wrong is hard to prove, too subjective and is not an argument in a court of law.

i would suggest making your work tighter. you have a lot of words and transitions in there that don't add anything.

just my general thoughts. also moved your thread to the Law study help
0
reply
janaisb
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#3
(Original post by Joleee)
if you re-read your work, your argument is extremely one sided.

what is the argument in favour of genetic modification? can we prevent disease or make persons more intelligent? i know almost nothing of the subject but i don't think it's all about aesthetics.

i wouldn't utter the words 'morally wrong' in a law essay. morally wrong is hard to prove, too subjective and is not an argument in a court of law.

i would suggest making your work tighter. you have a lot of words and transitions in there that don't add anything.

just my general thoughts. also moved your thread to the Law study help
Thank you! I will take all of this into account.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Regarding Ofqual's most recent update, do you think you will be given a fair grade this summer?

Yes (133)
29.82%
No (313)
70.18%

Watched Threads

View All