Messing with science?

[blas87]

Hopefully this is the right section to post this in...

I was watching Montel Williams yesterday morning, and the topic was about babies and children. One woman had 5 babies (quintuplets??) and another woman had already had 4 boys and wanted a girl, so she and her husband had done a procedure where all the Y chromosomes are removed and then the embroyo is injected into the woman, supposedly making the chances of having a girl better.

Do you guys agree with this? Of course it's expensive and a little questionable.

I have no problem with people using Invitro or sperm/egg donors. So many people are plagued with fertility problems and just want to have a baby any way they can.

Myself....I don't want any children, but if I were to, I'd want a girl. If I had the money and pigs flew and I found a great guy, I'd go for the procedure to make sure I had a girl.

What do you guys think of this scientific stuff?

[thrifty]

I think it is an interesting idea. To be honest I also want a girl as well, and the thought of this procedure sounds tempting. Although it is slightly tempting, I know my fiancee would never go for anything like this (he is a big believer in God's will, even though part my thought process is that it is God's will for this science to be made).

So because I know my fiancee's feeling against this are a lot stronger than my feeling for it, I wouldn't do it.

[crazylegs]

Well, 'sexing' your sperm is actually quite easy, stuck it in a centrifuge spin it for a bit and all the 'x' type will be at the bottom as is slightly heavier, then pick whicever part you want (not 100% though).

However this does raise some interesting ethical points,do we then start screening, say for eye colour, hair colour, certain diseases. Where would it end? What would happen to the families that could not afford this screening, what about some conditions that are more predominant in certain races (sickle cell anemia anyone?).

[AFPheonix]

I'm sure a lot of this stuff isn't covered under health insurance so I'd imagine it's pretty expensive, too.

What makes me sad is that there's so many little girls needing foster and adoptive homes. I don't know about anyone else, but my genes aren't all that special. If I turned out to be not fertile, I don't think I'd go through any heroic measures to have one of my own.

[blas87]

I woudn't go as far to get a certain eye color or anything like that, but, as mean as this souds, I would do everything possible to make sure my child was as normal and healthy as possible. Although I have heard that there can be tests taken while a woman is pregnant to determine if the child is at risk for mental disabilities...

[AFPheonix]

They can do that with an amniocentesis. In fact, out of us 6 kids, I was the only one my parents knew the gender of ahead of time since mom was old enough when she was pregnant with me that they were worried about mental disabilities and tested for them.

Jury's still out :p

[Seshat]

Honestly, I'd be happier with humanity as a species if we were as strict with ourselves as good breeders are with their animals.

I'd want it to be voluntary, though, which unfortunately means that many people wouldn't be doing it. I think it's too easy for such a program, if managed from a central organisation, to be taken over by someone with an agenda other than 'healthy' in mind.

But I'd love to see us screen for genetic illness, both by genetic testing and by matching sires and dams. But the latter isn't going to happen without major social upheaval, so I'd settle for the former.

I think it's no more ethical to knowingly breed a child with a high risk of genetic illness than it is to knowingly breed a dog with a high risk of severe hip dysplasia or patellar luxation.

On the other hand, I think it has to stop at 'healthy'. Sex isn't an illness. Nor are high cheekbones or low, a narrow or a wide jaw, a snub nose or a long beak of a nose.

I was about to say 'nor are eye colour or skin colour', but then I thought about me - I'm a pale northern european skin colour, and was raised in the subtropics. My eyes always hurt from too much bright sunlight, I sunburned even with sunscreen: for the location I was in, being pale was unhealthy. I've heard that the opposite also happens: really dark skinned people in the arctic or antarctic environments can have a vitamin D deficiency from lack of sunlight below the melanin layer. (I've heard it, I don't know how true it is.)

However, since both the palest and the darkest human melanin levels have places on Earth where they're the colour-of-best-fit, I think eye/skin/hair colour shouldn't be deemed a deformity. But people who raise pale kids in the tropics or dark kids in the arctic zones are daft! (Personal opinion only. ;) )

[AFPheonix]

Pretty much. There's a thread going on in the GBS forum at Something Awful about this lady:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health/2008/02/29/wagner.big.baby.small.mom.wlwt

If I recall correctly, the disease she has is the result of the expression of a dominant allele, so she's got a 50% chance of passing it on, and indeed has with her first child.
She also probably will have a shortened life due to her health, and will be depriving her girls of her presence later, not to mention the fact that she can barely diaper them, much less keep up with them when they age and get more active.
Personally, I think the parents were rather selfish to have borne them, even though they're cute kids and whatnot. They could have easily fostered, adopted, done the Big Brother/ Sister program, etc, but they had to have their own biological kids.

[Amethyst Hunter]

Personally, I think the parents were rather selfish to have borne them, even though they're cute kids and whatnot. They could have easily fostered, adopted, done the Big Brother/ Sister program, etc, but they had to have their own biological kids.

I think I've heard of that thread. I will never understand how somebody who knows darn well they stand a really good chance of passing on some biological nasties to a child could do that. (I'm talking serious shit here, not something minor like a touch of asthma or mild retardation) The world is cruel enough as it is, why make it any harder than it has to be for the poor kids? :confused:

[AFPheonix]

That's just it. Someone who's got a family history of cancer or heart disease can take steps in their lifestyle to help alleviate the risk. Someone who has a genetic chance to pass on blindness or deafness might have some pause, but their children won't necessarily be hurt if they receive the mutation, and their quality of life won't be horribly impacted, but this woman just sentenced her oldest child to a lifetime of pain, extremely brittle bones, a lifetime in a wheelchair, and a shortened lifespan. I just couldn't do that to someone I loved, I fail to see how she could.

[Sportsmom]

There's a preety good book out by Jodi Picoult called My Sister's Keeper.

Its about a girl who was "chosen" by her parents through genetic screening to be a match for her sister, who has a form of cancer. She decides at one point that she has had enough and goes to court to be medically emancipated. Pretty interesting stuff.

[Seshat]

That's one reason I'm for stem cell research, at least with umbilical stem cells or other 'waste' cells, and for stem cells harvested from adults such as the few nasal stem cells we have.

(I'm divided about embryonic. If we could be certain it'd only be 'waste' embryos that are generated anyway for IVF and never to be implanted, I think I'd be for it.)

If each person who needs a genetic match can be their own genetic match, we'll never (or almost never) need to face a situation like the one in the book. Noone will 'be created' to be a genetic match for their sibling - instead, we'll be able to harvest stem cells from the person themselves and grow whatever transplant item is required.

We may even, eventually, be able to modify the harvested stem cells to not have a genetic defect. Maybe. :)

[Hellbound Alleee]

I wouldn't use the word "science" in the same sentence as "The Montel Williams Show."

[BlaqueKatt]

simple-you want a specific gender- you adopt a pre-made child(not a baby), heck you can even pick eye-color/personality!

[DesignFox]

I'm not sure how I feel about people picking the gender of their child...

What if more people choose to have one sex than the other?

And, what if this leads to all sorts of additional genetic "tampering?"

The idea makes me uncomfortable. I can see why some people would want to do it, but...I dunno... :(

[anriana]

China and India are currently facing a shortage of women due to people aborting female fetuses in sex selective abortions. It makes far more sense to me to choose a fetus's gender at the very beginning than repeat a cycle of several months of pregnancy followed by surgery until the parents get the result they want.

[Rapscallion]

You know, with such an extreme attitude of not wanting women, women are going to become scarce and therefore valued...

Watch that space (the one between their ears).

Rapscallion

[DesignFox]

You know, with such an extreme attitude of not wanting women, women are going to become scarce...

That is what scares me a bit...and it's damn bothersome that entire cultures have this "women are worthless" attitude. Thankfully, this isn't as prevalent in today's society, but it irks me that it still exists in places.

Additionally, from an evolutionary standpoint, it makes no sense to abort females.

The world would go on with one man (assuming he wasn't impotent) and a bunch of women. Humanity would be screwed with one woman and a bunch of men. One woman can only bear so many children...and it isn't exactly a fast process.

Besides, I don't see why anyone would value their child any more or less based off of its gender.

:p

Oh wait...logic.

[Sylvia727]

Additionally, from an evolutionary standpoint, it makes no sense to abort females.

The world would go on with one man (assuming he wasn't impotent) and a bunch of women. Humanity would be screwed with one woman and a bunch of men. One woman can only bear so many children...and it isn't exactly a fast process.

Which is why men started becoming soldiers. If 9 out of 10 of them die, don't worry; the 10th guy will be more than happy to, ah, console the widows.

I don't think it's a 'women are worthless' attitude on the individual level, though, but more an acknowledge of the glass ceiling. If you can only have one child, wouldn't you want it to be the gender that makes more money and lives a better life?

It's not just China, either. I've encountered this attitude in my own neck of the woods, too, the Midwestern USA. Around here, it's disguised as chivalry, or family values. The wife shouldn't have to work, or she should be there for the kids. When I was ten years old, some adult relatives were asking me where I thought I'd go in life, asking about my future husband, future children, future house, etc. My mom asked me about my future job (I wanted to be a lawyer - I was a messed up kid :p ) These narrow-minded relatives exclaimed, "But how will you raise your children if you have a job?!" and my true devious nature was revealed; I was going to marry a stay-at-home dad. You'd have thought I was going to marry Satan, or possibly even a homosexual. It was quickly explained to me that REAL men have jobs and PROPER women stay home with the kids. So I wouldn't be surprised to see gender selection around here, either.

[DesignFox]

It was quickly explained to me that REAL men have jobs and PROPER women stay home with the kids. So I wouldn't be surprised to see gender selection around here, either.

Well, your relatives would have a heart attack if they talked to me, too. I don't want any kids. I just want a horse. :D

Seriously though, the idea that that would start happening scares me. Nature balances itself out. Meddling with that balance...not a good idea!

[Seshat]

When I was ten years old, some adult relatives were asking me where I thought I'd go in life, asking about my future husband, future children, future house, etc. My mom asked me about my future job (I wanted to be a lawyer - I was a messed up kid :p ) These narrow-minded relatives exclaimed, "But how will you raise your children if you have a job?!" and my true devious nature was revealed; I was going to marry a stay-at-home dad. You'd have thought I was going to marry Satan, or possibly even a homosexual. It was quickly explained to me that REAL men have jobs and PROPER women stay home with the kids. So I wouldn't be surprised to see gender selection around here, either.

. . . and I've had people tell me how unnecessary and outdated feminism is.

Le sigh.

[anriana]

Besides, I don't see why anyone would value their child any more or less based off of its gender.

:p

Oh wait...logic.


China has a one child policy so parents only get one choice if they want a male child.

India has a dowry system so female children drain the family financially.


The situations which create the preference for male children are stupid, but the decisions are logical.

[DesignFox]

China has a one child policy so parents only get one choice if they want a male child.

India has a dowry system so female children drain the family financially.

The situations which create the preference for male children are stupid, but the decisions are logical.

Oh, I understand those reasons. I was referring to people in the US who don't face those kinds of restrictions.

I figure the people you've mentioned will either change culturally, or those ideals will fade out as their population declines and there's no one around to buy into it.

I'm glad I live in a country where I'm valued for who I am...but that's another topic.

[blas87]

Oh please, I've already been considered "disowned" by a few relatives for being too much of a "city girl" with "frivolous dreams and silly goals" of having a career and making sure that I never have children and put marraige as my last priority.

[Sylvia727]

The problem is only going to get worse if primarily sexist countries don't reshape their thinking. Taking China for example, MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5953508) puts their numbers at 120 boys for every 100 girls, with the disparity quickly rising. When those girls grow up, do you think they will be given a choice as to their future? It will be their civic duty to marry someone. And what will the leftover men do for mates? We could very well see male homosexuality being encouraged sharply while female homosexuality is discouraged sharply.

According to the same article, human trafficing is on the rise as bachelors buy their brides. "Reverse dowries" could go through the roof as the girls' fathers auction them off. Mail order brides start going into Asia instead of coming out.

***

While a part of me would love to design my own offspring - I've always wanted a redhead, for example - the rational/pessimistic side of my brain is screaming about the consequences of allowing that technology for public applications. Even if I could trust myself as an individual not to abuse that responsibility, which I'm not sure I do, I don't trust us as a society not to create a similiar trend. We might skew gender rates, or increase the sexual dichotomy (only men get muscular forms, only women get slender forms), or only create children who conform to our standards of beautiful. The racial applications would be...interesting. And if homosexuality really is genetic, as some scientists have been suggesting, what effect would that have on your design sessions? As a child born into this hypothetical society, I'd be seriously freaked about how much free will I really had. How much did my parents program me and how much is random chance?

[Boozy]

The problem is only going to get worse if primarily sexist countries don't reshape their thinking. Taking China for example, MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5953508) puts their numbers at 120 boys for every 100 girls, with the disparity quickly rising. When those girls grow up, do you think they will be given a choice as to their future? It will be their civic duty to marry someone. And what will the leftover men do for mates?

Classically, this kind of demographics situation breeds intense competitive attitudes leading to higher crime rates.

Men without women will find other ways to fill their time.

[DesignFox]

Classically, this kind of demographics situation breeds intense competitive attitudes leading to higher crime rates.

Men without women will find other ways to fill their time.

I shudder to think what may happen to the women if men start fighting over them.

[novicecrafter]

I am almost 99% sure I was just reading an article/essay about how there are more men then women in china. You would think logically that it would lead to women having more value but it actually had the exact opposite. What ended up happening is men SHARING wives and even RENTING THEM. Im know for a fact this does not apply to every man but many men would be perfectly happy to have the sex and the at home servent minus the kids. So I guess wife sharing could go a long way before it reaches serious hurdles. *sighs*

*race is also a huge potential "selling point" for genetic tampering. The "us vs them" mentality has been around since we were flinging poo at our neighbors from trees. It doesnt even need to be based on actual physical characteristics either I have met many rich and even middle class people who view the lower class as a "completely different animal". *sighs*

[Jadedcarguy]

Myself....I don't want any children....................

Marry me.


...............and put marraige as my last priority.

Aw crap. ;)


I think all of this is a big gray area. On one hand, screening for disease can identify trouble early, but on the other hand what do you do if you find something that can't be fixed? HUGE gray area. :(

As far as selecting eye and hair color, let it ride, man. If my parents had done that with my siblings and me, we'd have some really creepy-ass "children of the corn" portraits sitting around.:D

My eyes are green and I have dark brown hair. My bro is a blue-eyed blond, while my sister has brown eyes and light brown hair. We're all related, you can see the resemblance, but I'm glad to look a bit different. :)

[Fuzzykitten99]

I never could understand parents who wished for one particular gender over the other.

So if they didn't do the genetic modification, and you don't get the gender you want, is that baby less of a person to them?

With both my pregnancies, I knew based on my husband's father's family history of producing boys, I was probably going to end up with them. And I did. I didn't really wish for either sex, just a HEALTHY baby. To me, wishing for one gender over the other, is stupid. Why not be happy with what you get?

To me, saying "We're trying for a _______ " is like saying to the other kids that they weren't REALLY what the parents wanted.