Genetically modifying babies is a form of reproductive assistance
Scientists accept other forms of reproductive assistance. Why not genetic modification?
<
(3 of 3)
Next argument >
The Argument
In the modern age, assisted reproductive technology has become less taboo. A third of U.S. adults have used or know someone who has used fertility treatments.[1] The genetic modification of babies should be considered like these treatments - an opportunity for more couples to have children.
Counter arguments
The scientific community should not consider genetic modification as just another reproductive measure. Although other forms of reproductive assistance are common, genetic modification carries unique risks. The procedure involves restructuring genes in dramatic ways, unlike other reproductive assistance measures. Genetic modification could harm the mother and child in grievous ways, making it necessary to avoid.
Premises
[P1] Our society accepts many forms of reproductive assistance.
[P2] We should accept the genetic modification of babies as another form of assisted reproductive technology.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P2] The argument assumes that genetic modification of babies is identical to other forms of reproductive assistance.