Have you considered PGD?

I am tired of the debates about old-fashioned conceptions and foolish misconceptions. We're supposed to be a forward-looking bunch, aren't we? So I'd like to introduce what is likely to be one of the biggest ethical debates in the coming years regarding the making of babies: Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis.

PGD and its cousin, PGH (preimplantation genetic haplotyping) give parents the opportunity to screen their embryos for genetic disorders. The list of disorders and predispositions it is possible to screen for are growing by leaps and bounds. Not to mention you can test whether the child is "predisposed" to be male or female. This website actually sponsors on a search for PGD:

http://www.fertility-docs.com/fertility_gender.phtml?gclid=CLTY1OiMhIcCFTdNGAod3x3taA

Here's a press release on the (very) new possibilities with PGH:

http://www.guysandstthomas.nhs.uk/page3607.htm

So, prospective parents. Are you ready to start giving your future children a leg up in the game of genetic roulette? First step is to check your family history and get your own genes screened to find out if you are a carrier of any disorders.

Next, to carry out the procedure you'll need to go to a clinic and do in vitro fertilization. After the zygote(s) has been created and allowed to divide a few times, a cell will be extracted and its DNA tested. The clinicians can check for specific conditions you have a high risk of passing on, or (with PGH) multiple genetic factors for everything from cystic fibrosis to high breast cancer risk.

When these tests become more widely available (and they will over the next several years) would you consider using them to increase your chances of having a healthy child?

If you live in the United States, the doctors already can and will do screening, sometimes by law.

I've had 3 children (born in the 1990's) and they were all screened for this, that, and another thing - they don't bother to even ask the parents in most cases. It's just done - though the tests aren't as invasive as what you describe. This is mostly for some very, very, very serious stuff - stuff where the baby has little chance of survival if any.

I guarantee the moment these things can be done relatively noninvasively, they will be, and parents will have little choice about it. Think: insurance companies, and money.

Eugenics? Unfair selection? Tragedy? All of those horrors, you bet.

Yes, a number of genetic tests have been done prenatal and on newborns for many years. The difference with PGD is that the tests are done before you ever get pregnant, and open up the possibility of selecting for a wide variety of traits and disease factors, rather than waiting to see what your child actually inherited.

The influence of insurance companies could be a major problem in this. What if they decide to start charging higher rates for naturally conceived children versus ones who have already been cleared of major genetic diseases?

The real issue isn't the screening. The way technology is going it will soon be possible to modify your child's abilities. And not just health related things but elective stuff as well. Hair color, eye color, skin color, intelligence, whether they have a genetic predisposition to stay thin, left handed or right handed, those sorts of things.

Is it ok for you to decide if you child has black hair or blond hair? Is it ok for you to ensure that your child has an IQ of 155 and that they will stay thin their entire life? How about maybe that they have the eye hand coordination to be a star quarterback in the NFL?

Is it ok to manipulate an unborn child's DNA to suit your own desires?

Personally I don't think I would be able to resist.

Hmm. A more relevant movie would be Gattaca.

I know I would be very tempted to preselect out the propensity for obesity and high blood pressure that comes from one half of my family.

lol never seen Gattaca, I have seen Universal Soldier and a few of its other equally-if-not-more cheesy sequels

Too bad we can't screen for Assclownieness.

The problem with genetic selection is this: There are always repercussions. Some are as mild as a tendency to melanoma with red hair, some may be as subtle and insidious as selecting for less fat and more muscle only to select out the genetic resistance to HIV.

Screening for serious diseases? Yes. Complete manipulation and foresight? Not yet, and probably not ever. I personally want my genotype done so I can copyright it into the far-flung future.