I feel as though it is okay to consider “genetic alteration” if your baby presents physical factors such as blindness, deafness or other major, life altering birth defects. I even support heredity trait alterations for babies that would be born with diseases that limit the child from living a normal, fulfilled life. Although pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) already enables testing for the presence of a certain phenotype, society does not consider this to be altering the genes of an embryo. Rather it is just choosing only the embryos that do not contain the genetic disorder to be implanted back into the uterus. I certainly agree with the practice of in-vetro and PGD; however, to consider genetically engineering your unborn child because you want them to have straight hair as opposed to curly hair or blue eyes instead of green, shifts the demand for genetic altering practices to create more cutting edge technology. There has to be a limit somewhere and deciding if your child will be athletic or artistic should be where the line is drawn. If we take away the idea of offspring evolving naturally, then we also take away the uniqueness of our society. Sure, it would be great if I were taller and an amazing athlete, but I would want to naturally possess those traits, not because my parents chose characteristics from a menu at ‘Build a Baby Workshop.’
In my opinion, ethics play a large role in this debate. Some people find this idea exciting and the