In an age of extreme technological advancements, it seems that the idea of human perfection is closer than ever as scientists continue to conceive new ways to improve genetic engineering.The focus of this growth serves to offer different ways to rid children of disabilities and diseases before they are even born, yet the line between what is ethical becomes blurred following what divides an inconvenience from a disability. Genetic engineering will serve to undermine rather than enhance humanity, as social stratification is sure to ensue, and the indistinct ethical line, crossed.
Money is a major component in every person's life, and a steady economy keeps our country stable. Therefore wealth alone can reap a better education, therefore better jobs, more opportunities, a better future, and ultimately even more money. The idea of genetic modification is that it would make everyone healthier, and even if it is unethical to boost an IQ, it would be helping those less fortunate to get an equal footing in life. Yet this engineering proves to be only another thing that can only be afforded by the wealthy.
These are children who would in any event go to the finest doctors and schools, and will now be getting an even bigger head start on health and achievement. Not only this, but there will be a social stratification between those with and without modifications, as these people are guaranteed to be healthy, more intelligent and wealthy, while those without, which would constitute the lower middle class and the poor, would be categorized as having diseases and being less intelligent. Naturally, institutes and businesses are going to pick those more qualified, meaning those who attended better schools, and are guaranteed to be intelligent and healthy.
With this stratification there is almost no competition when it comes to a wealthy genetically modified person, and one that is not, in obtaining jobs. Therefore, America would be split into two classes, the upper, genetically engineered, and the lower, poor class, the middle class eliminated, causing for no circulation of money as the rich get richer and the poor, poorer.
The line between a disability and an inconvenience diminishes, especially when parents, who want only the best for their children, are involved. People will continue pushing for perfection because the human desire for perfect control and perfect happiness is insatiable and genetic engineering seems to lead to just that. Not only this, but it is possible that some parents will want their children to have disabilities, such is the case with Sharon Duchesneau and Candy McCullough who attempted to make their children deaf.
Many see it as wrong and unethical that parents would have the control to give their child a major defect, without the child's say in it. Yet when a parent makes a choice for their child to change who or what they are before they are even born, it is unethical. Major disabilities, such as severe forms of autism or deformities that may cause these children to live in constant pain are one thing, yet choosing specific traits for your child is another.
Although the line between the two seems clear, once the door to genetic engineering opens, the question is, who will regulate what is ethical and acceptable and what is not. The government could make laws, but if there are things such as learning disabilities that are not major but curable, it is not fair that they do not receive the help that they need, just because it is not severe enough.
Genetic engineering is something that not everyone will be able to afford, which will cause vast socioeconomic stratification, not only this, but there is no clear line between what is ethical or not, and what is defined as an inconvenience or a disability.
When the technology is available, who is to say that a child should not receive the help they could easily afford just because their impairment is not severe enough. Therefore, genetic engineering will prove to undermine, rather than enhance humanity.