Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Wisdom of Caution: Genetic Enhancement and Future Children

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many scholars predict that the technology to modify unborn children genetically is on the horizon. According to supporters of genetic enhancement, allowing parents to select a child’s traits will enable him/her to experience a better life. Following their logic, the technology will not only increase our knowledge base and generate cures for genetic illness, but it may enable us to increase the intelligence, strength, and longevity of future generations as well. Yet it must be examined whether supporters of genetic enhancement, especially libertarians, adequately appreciate the ethical hazards emerging from the technology, including whether its use might violate the harm principle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. John Robertson examines a somewhat similar scenario, i.e. whether parents should be permitted to select a fertilized embryo based on whether it carries the gene for “perfect pitch” (Robertson 2003, pp. 464–467).

  2. The author would like to thank the journal’s editors for helping to point out this issue.

  3. An analogy can be drawn with professional sports where if performance-enhancing drugs become common, it almost forces individual athletes to use them in order to remain competitive.

  4. A term taken from Alvin Weinberg, although he used it in a different context (he was not referring to genetic technologies).

  5. Along related lines, the meaning of term “progress” can be fairly ambiguous. For instance, Leo Marx discusses how “progress” might refer to the goal of promoting human well-being but it is often equated with technological advancement (Marx 1987).

  6. For example, consider the decades old debate about whether DDT should be used to prevent the spread of malaria, which resulted in part from scientific uncertainty and political disagreements. In 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) reconsidered its policy on DDT and decided to support the use of the pesticide in Africa.

  7. Along these lines, Governor Sonny Perdue of Georgia encouraged Atlanta public schools to close down for 2 days during October of 2005 in order to reduce fuel consumption.

References

  • Agar, N. (2004). Liberal eugenics: In defence of human enhancement. USA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R. (2005). Liberation biology. New York: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berenson, A. (2005). 2nd trial for Merck on Vioxx begins. The New York Times, September 15, C1.

  • Buck v. Bell, 274 US 200 (1927).

  • Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). Assisted reproductive technology report: Success rates: National summary and fertility clinic reports, at http://www.cdc.gov/ART/ART02/index.htm. Accessed December 12, 2005.

  • Elliott, C. (2003). Better than well: American medicine meets the American dream. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erb, B. J. (1999). Deconstructing the human egg: The FDA’s regulation of scientifically created babies. Roger Williams University Law Review, 5, 273–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2001). Preconception gender selection for nonmedical reasons. Fertility and Sterility, 75(5), 861–864.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankel, A. (2005). The Fen-Phen follies: Mistaken assumptions, greedy lawyers and suggestions of fraud have made Fen-Phen a disaster of a mass tort. The American Lawyer, March 1.

  • Fukuyama, F. (2002). In defense of nature, human and non-human. WorldWatch, 30–32.

  • Garreau, J. (2005). Inventing our evolution: We’re almost able to build better human beings. But are we ready? The Washington Post, May 16, A1.

  • Gazzaniga, M. (2005). The Ethical Brain. New York: Dana Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glew, G. M., Fan, M. Y., Katon, W., Rivara, F. P., & Kernic, M. A. (2005). Bullying, psychosocial adjustment, and academic performance in elementary school. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 159, 1026–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, N. S. (2004). Risks of birth defects and other adverse outcomes associated with assisted reproductive technology. Pediatrics, 114, 256–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 US 479 (1965).

  • Groopman, J. (2002) Science fiction. The New Yorker, February 4.

  • Hecht, A. H. (2001). The Wild Wild West: Inadequate regulation of assisted reproductive technology. Houston Journal Health Law & Policy, 1, 227–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmerhorst, F. M., Perquin, D. A., Donker, D., & Keirse, M. J. (2004). Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: A systematic review of controlled studies. British Medical Journal, 328, 261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IVF treatment killed my daughter. (2005). BBC News, June 30, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4635261.stm. Accessed May 4, 2007.

  • Judge, T. A., & Cable, D. M. (2004). The effect of physical height on workplace success and income: Preliminary test of a theoretical model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 428–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kass, L. (1998). The wisdom of repugnance. In: A. H. Teich (Ed.), Technology and the future (9th ed., pp. 209–224). Belmont: Wadsworth, 2003.

  • Kass, L. R. (2003). Beyond therapy: Biotechnology and the pursuit of human improvement. President’s Council on Bioethics Meeting, at http://www.bioethics.gov/background/kasspaper.html. Accessed June 29, 2006.

  • Krugman, S. (1986). The Willowbrook hepatitis studies revisited: Ethical aspects. Reviews of Infectious Diseases, 8(1), 157–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labaton, S., & Nixon, R. (2007). OSHA leaves worker safety largely in hands of industry. The New York Times, April 25, A1.

  • Marx, L. (1987). Does improved technology mean progress? Technology Review, January, 33–41.

  • McKibben, B. (2003). Do we want science to reinvent human aging? In: D. Zeldow (Ed.), The fight over the future: A collection of SAGE crossroads debates that examine the implications of aging-related research (pp. 19–43). New York: IUniverse.

  • Nelson, D., & Weiss, R. (2000). Penn researchers sued in gene therapy death; Teen’s parents also name ethicist as defendant. The Washington Post, September 19, A3.

  • New York’s Task Force on Life and the Law. (2001). Executive summary of assisted reproductive technologies: Analysis and recommendations for public policy, at http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/taskfce/execsum.htm. Accessed December 12, 2005.

  • Pence, G. E. (2008). Classic cases in medical ethics (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J. A. (2003). Procreative liberty in the era of genomics. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 29, 439–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J. A. (2004). Procreative liberty and harm to offspring in assisted reproduction. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 30, 7–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz, D. (2000). Human well-being and federal science. In D. L. Kleinman (Ed.), Science, technology, and democracy (pp. 87–102). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, L. M. (1997). Remaking Eden: Cloning and beyond in a brave new world. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, N., & Aung, K. M. (2007). A free ride for bullies. The New York Times, September 23.

  • Stock, G. (2003). Redesigning humans: Choosing our genes, changing our future. New York: Mariner Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutcliffe, A. G. (2002). Health risks in babies born after assisted reproduction. British Medical Journal, 325, 117–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, Y.-P., Shimizu, E., Dube, G. R., Rampon, C., Kerchner, G. A., Zhuo, M., et al. (1999). Genetic enhancement of learning and memory in mice. Nature, 401, 63–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, F., Wang, G. D., Kerchner, G. A., Kim, S. J., Xu, H. M., Chen, Z. F., et al. (2001). Genetic enhancement of inflammatory pain by forebrain NR2B overexpression. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 164–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, A. M. (1966). Can technology replace social engineering? In: A. H. Teich (Ed.), Technology and the future (10th ed., pp. 27–34). Belmont: Wadsworth, 2006.

  • Who is the Father? (2004). CBSNews.com, July 15, at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/15/health/main629893.shtml. Accessed December 12, 2005.

  • Yoshino, K., & Lobdell, W. (2005). Ambition, flaws mix at university. Los Angeles Times, November 11, at http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/11/local/me-oversight11. Accessed September 7, 2009.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Research Ethics Programs, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, 685 Cherry Street, Atlanta, GA, 30332-0345, USA

    Jason Borenstein

Authors
  1. Jason Borenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason Borenstein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Borenstein, J. The Wisdom of Caution: Genetic Enhancement and Future Children. Sci Eng Ethics 15, 517–530 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-009-9183-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-009-9183-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation