Genetic engineering has been one of the most controversial ethical issues since 1997; when Dolly the first successfully cloned sheep was announced. Dolly has redefined the meaning of "identical twin"; not only does she look exactly like her mother she also has the same genetic make up. This experiment was not only impossible but unthinkable. Yet, Dr. Ian Wilmut revealed Dolly on February 23, 1997, at seven months old ( Travis 1). On the surface genetic engineering may appear to be the solution to all of society's ills and the worlds problems. In all actuality it may have tremendous and unknown side effects. The issues that surround genetic engineering undoubtedly make it immoral and ethically wrong.
Genetic Engineering as defined by Susan A. Hagedorn is:
The manipulation of an organism's genetic endowment by introducing or eliminating genes through modern molecular biology techniques. A broad
definition of genetic engineering also includes selective breeding and other means
of artificial selection ( "Genetic Engineering" 1).
After hearing of the "creation" of Dolly Americans soon learned the harsh fact surrounding her creation. Dr. Wilmut's success was accompanied by 276 failures. This success rate is no where near clinically acceptable. To start the developing of the eggs they were shocked with electric pulses; twenty nine of the 277 of these eggs began to divide. The eggs, at that point were implanted into adult female sheep; thirteen of which became pregnant, and only the one of 277 eggs were born - Dolly ( Wilmut 1).
Long term prospects of mammal cloning remain in question. this is no where near clinically acceptable for experimentation on humans.
In the months following the news of Dolly, President Clinton requested, " a through review of the legal and ethical issues associated with the use of this technology... with recommendations on possible federal actions to prevent its abuse" (Shermer 1). The answer is clear-- there is no safe place to draw the line on when genetic engineering is acceptable and is not. Governments can not say that the uses are strictly limited to curing disease because then there becomes a question of what is a genetic disease. For example, we may feel comfortable defining a mutation in the cystic fibrosis gene as causing disease if it leads to chronic respiratory infections from birth to death at the age of twenty five. However a different mutations in the same gene might caused little or no problem is this also cystic fibrosis? Other unknown aspects of an individuals genetic make-up and environmental factors also influence the outcome. Soon to be parents were advised that their child had an extra chromosome that would not cause Down syndrome, but this mutation was possibly linked to other undesirable traits such as severe acne and aggressive behavior. Given those circumstances the parents of a would be infant, may selfishly chose to abort the child(Shenk 6). To many Americans today the abortion of that child was wrong yet, in a genetically altered society the egg would be thrown away, implying that it was not normal or was not what the parents wanted.
To simply remove the gene that causes increased aggression and reprogram it to be very passive and optimistic, is a possibility for parents. But why stop there? The parents agree that their child will be tall, peaking somewhere between five feet eight and five feet eleven female and near six feet three inches because dad wants a NFL quarterback and mom want a super model. Both mom and dad have decided that the child should be smart, to take out the obesity gene, the gene that controls the risk of alcoholism, also the one that runs the risk of the child getting lung cancer, and lastly the gene that is prone to hereditary heart failure. It is at this point where you find the parents searching for their children in a catalogs, altering the child...