Prenatal parental designing of children and the problem of acceptance

Abstract

Seemingly ever improving medical technology and techniques portend the possibility of prenatally enhancing otherwise healthy, normal children-seamlessly enhancing or adding to a child's natural abilities and characteristics. Though parents normally engage in enhancing children, i.e., child rearing, these technologies present radically new possibilities. This sort of enhancement, I argue, is morally problematic for the parent: the expectations of the enhancing parent necessarily conflict with attitudes of acceptance that moral parenting requires. Attitudes of acceptance necessitate that parents are open to the essentially-individual choices of the child that will determine the kind of person he or she becomes. However, the intentional act of enhancing contradicts this openness by setting expectations on who the child becomes. Because of this, there is strong moral weight against parents' prenatally enhancing their children.

Desafíos éticos del biomejoramiento moral

“…Y podría ocurrir que estas dos voluntades no coincidiesen. El hijo modificado puede no admitir la intervención a la que ha sido sometida y considere que el derecho a su identidad ha sido vulnerado (Jensen, 2018;Primc, 2020). A todo ello se añade la inquietud que sufrirían los padres al decidir sobre la existencia y el desarrollo de su futuro hijo, condicionados por los estándares de calidad planteados por los valores morales o de bienestar personal instaurados socialmente (Tamir, 2018;Anomaly, 2018).…”

Islam, Culture, and Reprogenetics: Implementation of Genetic and Reproductive Technologies in Qatar

“…These tests include two main types: prenatal and pre‐marital. Prenatal testing screens the health of the fetus during different stages of the pregnancy period, and it has almost become part of the standard care that each pregnant woman is expected to receive, despite the host of moral problems they often involve (Jensen 2018). Pre‐marital testing aims to screen prospective couples and examine their carrier status for certain genetic conditions that may affect their (reproductive) health or that of their future children.…”

Ethical Challenges of Germline Genetic Enhancement

“…In summary, these studies may suggest that a balanced equation of risks and benefits would not suffice to determine the ethical assessment and morality of a technique. Rather, deeper understanding of key concepts identity, nature and dignity is necessary (Chan, 2015; De Melo-Martín, 2018; Jensen, 2018).…”

“…parents, guardians or institutions) and the will of the enhanced individual (Tamir, 2018) which may not always coincide. Furthermore, a second dilemma is posed: the autonomy of parents who want to have a child may be deeply conditioned by the balance between their personal interests and the altruism of their action (Gordon-Solmon, 2015; DeGrazia, 2016; Jensen, 2018).…”

“…The root of this disruption may be found in the moral imperative–the moral good as obligation–and its mandatory application leading to morally designed individuals (Holland, 2016). In the same line, psychological pressure on parents would be especially significant (Bonte et al, 2014) to encourage them to choose the “best” embryo amongst several, that would be the most “valuable,” “intelligent” or “excellent,” a quantification attitude that would seem incoherent, or at least surprising, for parents with unconditional affection for any of their children (Tonkens, 2011; Jensen, 2018). Therefore, some authors have taken another approach and are inclined to transform the obligation into suggestion, option or advice (Jacobs, 2015; Carter, 2015; Francis, 2015; Sparrow, 2015; Kanaris, 2017; Liao, 2019).…”