Designer babies--why not?
by
Evans M.
University of Wales Swansea,
Wales, UK.
N Z Bioeth J. 2001 Feb;2(1):17-25.

ABSTRACT

Though many objections can be levelled against the idea of the practice of genetic intervention to produce 'designer babies', upon examination they are shown to hinge on features which concern parental intentions towards their children, rather than features specific to the means involved. These intentions may be pursued by a variety of social practices which may, though need not, involve a measure of 'traditional' genetic selection (i.e. in terms of the identity and characteristics of the reproducing partners). This paper reviews a number of these objections and, by parity of reasoning, rejects their claim to count specifically or decisively against genetic intervention in pursuit of 'designer babies'. Rejecting these objections does not lead to the endorsement of 'designing babies, but it shows that any unease must be grounded elsewhere and defended by other arguments.

Eugenics talk
Reprogenetics
Liberal Eugenics
Private eugenics
Personal genomics
Psychiatric genetics
Philosophy on steroids
Human self-domestication
Selecting potential children
Germline genetic engineering
Mood genes and human nature
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis
'The Principle of Procreative Beneficience'
Francis Galton and contemporary eugenics
Gene therapy and performance enhancement
The commercialisation of pre-natal enhancement
Designer baby" changed to French for "double hope baby"

Refs
and further reading

HOME
Resources
Wireheading
BLTC Research
nootropic.com
Superhappiness?
Utopian Surgery?
The Good Drug Guide
The Abolitionist Project
The Hedonistic Imperative
The Reproductive Revolution
MDMA: Utopian Pharmacology
Critique of Huxley's Brave New World