Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 09:31:21 pm

Author Topic: Ethics (Unit 2): Practice Questions  (Read 3194 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

caffinatedloz

  • VIC MVP - 2019
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
  • Respect: +856
Ethics (Unit 2): Practice Questions
« on: July 25, 2019, 09:56:03 pm »
+1
Hello friends,
I was hoping that we could start up a thread to practice taking a stance on issues in ethics and explaining our opinion will addressing alternate opinions.

I might post a new issue to discuss fortnightly, depending on if this thread gets very popular. I will also post my own opinion and evaluation.

The first issue: Should genetic editing of humans (including foetuses) be illegal?

Can't wait to see some really great discussion!

caffinatedloz

  • VIC MVP - 2019
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1461
  • Respect: +856
Re: Ethics (Unit 2): Practice Questions
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2019, 08:58:45 pm »
0
Should genetic editing of humans (including foetuses) be illegal?
I think that I would probably take a proportional ethicist approach to this issue. As a general rule, I believe that genetic editing of humans, especially foetuses, should not occur. This is still an experimental approach and humanity is not fully aware of the harms that could be caused by genetic editing. As unborn babies are unable to consent to have such a risky and life-altering procedure done, I do not think it should be allowed. What gives parents the right to interfere with nature without their child's consent? However, for adults who are able to consent and make their own decisions, I believe that this is a different issue. As long as a person is making the choice for themselves and understands the risks and potential harms, I believe that they have the right to make this choice.

The only time that I would consider it moral to alter the genes of a child is if they have a genetic condition that would be fatal if nothing was done. In this case, altering their genes may save their life so it may be the right choice. However, there would have to be proportional evidence that their genetic abnormality was life threatening.