Essay Sample on Genetic Imbalance and The Choices Between Life and Death

Introduction

Eugenic is a set of practices and beliefs that aim to improve the quality of human beings through the elimination of humans with faulty genes (Wilson, & Pierre, 2016). It is a choice between life and death that some philosophers are trying to explain. The use of eugenics as a means to produce better human species and reliable ones that has no defects. Life itself is a gift from the supreme being and it is never right for anyone to determine who dies and who lives. The matter of defect that is a result of genes and also family hereditary should never be the key to end life. Imagine this is you in the womb of your mother and the doctor says that you should not finish your nine months inside there.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

It would be traumatic to both your parents and you as an infant waiting to be born into the world. Some argue that the world should be having perfect beings, humans without any birth defects. How will the world be? If you ask me, I would say boring simply because, there would be no discoveries of various ailments, the discovery of extreme outstanding genes in human beings. All these have been enhanced by the human race which is a mixed populace of both defective genes and normal genes. Therefore, this paper seeks to develop its content through the thoughts of Tom Shakespeare on the rights one has to make and the right to live even with defective genes.

Based on his writings Tom Shakespeare is a phenomenal writer of philosophy who question the existence of a perfect world (Wasserman, Wachbroit & Bickenbach 2005). His writings give light to the way humans should appreciate the value of life. Life is a gift that no one chooses to be given the kind they prefer if life was to be chosen then each and every human being would have loved to be given the best life. As we try to argue which is the best kind of life on this planet, Tom says that "life is full of abundance and opportunity that we must use to explore so that we can find the perfection we need." As a renowned philosopher who speaks against the abuse of life and everybody has a choice to make. His argument is for life and not against life, he emphasizes the need for people to be given chances in life.

So, what happens when life is determined by the use of x-rays such that if you are detected to be having any defects then your life ends there. This is particularly wrong since life is not supported only by defects but also by the intelligent quotients that the fetus has. Which brings the question on why should abortion be legalized? The legality of abortion does not hold ground on some basis as seen in the widespread media and courts. Many find it easier to abort when they see that the child has a defect. But such defects are not inherited but they are defects caused by the parents themselves to the child while in the womb. Defects caused by the parents should be charged to the parents and not the child. The child has a moral right to live and not be subjected to the parent's mistakes (Wasserman et al.,2005).

When an accident occurs and one suffers a loss of either the limbs or the arms and gets deformed, should they be cut off or let to live? Such are the moral questions that some scientists should be asked. Altering or changing defective genes not only reduces the chances of life becoming oblivion but also creates a life that is unwarranted by God. Based on the famous philosopher Rene Descartes, "I think therefore I am." He clearly says that what you think is what you become. If a child thinks they are normal and act normal even if they have some birth defects then it is right to let that child be what they are.

Disability is not an inability to do things. Toms text speaks highly of individuals who have made a choice of accepting their disabilities. In countries where the majority of kids who suffer down syndrome are treated with extreme care, they also have come up with a mandatory test that any pregnant women should take. These tests are mandatory like in Britain where the health care service is offered to both the prenatal and post-natal mothers. Some emphasize the removal of a fetus with open spina bifida, anencephaly, Huntingdon's disease, down syndrome, and Duchenne muscular dystrophy (Wasserman et al.,2005). Such opinions of obstetricians have made it traumatizing to a couple who want to bear kids but fear that they might not get them. The belief that eugenics can be believed by the medical fraternity has made birth to be a selective ordeal. Selective in the sense that unhealthy pregnancies can be terminated based on the scanned images. This kind of selective birth hinders the rights of many couples who might be their first time to get pregnant and they are told to terminate the pregnancy due to an unhealthy baby.

The choices we make as people with the right sound of mind should reflect our ability to promote life. Whether healthy or unhealthy a child should live. As seen with the current research that some individuals with some birth defects have a unique genome that enhances their capabilities beyond normal human beings. People living and born with disabilities have raised concerns over the frequent and mandatory test that pregnant mothers undergo without their knowledge. Some say these tests are unethical and infringe the rights of pregnant mothers. When rights are infringed through the tests which have no consent, then women feel that they have been violated. Also, some test such as the PKU(Phenylketonuria) is carried out without the cost of the parents since it is a "opt out" and "opt-in" policy. Such test although might of beneficial in the long run to determine the healthiness of a child it is also important to use such tests to show compassion and care (Wasserman et al.,2005).

I believe that as humans being who are adopting new technological ways, it is important to use technology for the betterment of the future. How do we use technology better in our future.? The introduction of prenatal screening or testing has helped to detect problems in fetal development. Since doctors and nurses depend on the test to determine the health conditions of the mother, they also use the test to encourage the removal of the abnormal or unhealthy fetus. After the test are confirmed the mother has to make a choice which triggers dilemma and problems.

Choices of either to keep or remove the unhealthy fetus is the lingering question that the parents will be left with. Parents are encouraged to think carefully about the choices they make since they have a right to refuse. Therefore, the choices one is left with can be limited and also there is the factor of trauma that is felt after the new is given to the couples. There is also discrimination, which can be either intentional or non-intentional against the soon to be parents. In comparison to the earlier year's children were delivered without the use of screening or any form of test. This raised a generation where there is an appreciation of God's creation. In the technological era, there has been a lot discouragement by the doctors and also the society at large. Such a scenario paints a grim picture of the future generations.

In his testament Tom Shakespeare say, "there is no morally salient, difference between the restrictions faced by those who cannot hear, see, or perform feats or athleticism..." such comments allude the fear that we are all born equal but with different capabilities (Wasserman et al.,2005). A person can be born healthy and without any disability but find themselves due to unavoidable circumstance they are rendered disable. Bioethics are neither neutral nor above societal influence rather they are a reflection of the prejudice and social knowledge. Different scholars have made assumptions about human disabilities with others terming it as bio utilitarianism (Wasserman et al.,2005). Life is full itself and also valuable than the life of an individual with intellectual disabilities as Vehmas puts it. The sentiment echoed here represents the value of human beings both able and disabled.

Conclusion

In conclusion, eugenics has brought a lot of disparity in the human race. A disparity in the sense that some feel that a human who cannot perform at 100 percent capabilities should not be born. This is unethical since life is life whether able or disabled, they still have the chance to live. Parental consent is also crucial when a parent consents to a procedure it means that they have accepted the process. In my own opinion, I believe in the rule of a pragmatist who solves problems at hand without postponing it. Our choice in life also has a greater influence, one simple mistake can lead to either loss of life and regret later in life. Therefore, in the words of Tom Shakespeare, "Every impairment is different and each can impact on lives to a greater or lesser extent. Equally, every family and every life is different."

Works Cited

Wasserman, D., Wachbroit, R., & Bickenbach, J. (Eds.). (2005). Quality of life and human difference: Genetic testing, health care, and disability. Cambridge University Press.

Wilson, R. A., & Pierre, J. S. (2016). Eugenics and disability. Rethinking Disability: World Perspectives in Culture and Society, 93-112.

Retrieved from https://www.scholar.google.com