Would you have your baby's genes screened?

[Techno-Druid]

Let's say you and your partner had the option to select any number of fertilized eggs made from your sperm/eggs. The doctors could identify the likelihood for genetic disorders, whether the baby will be born with Down Syndrome and even distinguish the embryos based on gender, hair and eyes color. You're given the option to select the embryo of your choice for IVF.

If given the opportunity, would you choose this method over traditional reproduction? What would be your reasoning for or against it?

[Sunseeker]

Oh hell yes, I mean why roll the dice on disabilities (especially if you know you might be a carrier) when you can just not? I think hair and gender and eye color might be a little weird, but on the same token, I don't really give a shit. I'm just waiting for the full "baby customizer" to come out so that we can ensure our kids are hotter and smarter too.

Again, not that I'd have children. But if I were and could ensure they were as healthy as possible? Heck yeah.

Plot twist: the smarter and hotter your kid is the more evil they are.

[PC2]

Let's say you and your partner had the option to select any number of fertilized eggs made from your sperm/eggs. The doctors could identify the likelihood for genetic disorders, whether the baby will be born with Down Syndrome and even distinguish the embryos based on gender, hair and eyes color. You're given the option to select the embryo of your choice for IVF.

If given the opportunity, would you choose this method over traditional reproduction?

Of course and eventually everyone would have to improve their offspring through this and other means. Unless a parent simply doesn't care that their kids will be relatively disadvantaged for their entire life.

What would be your reasoning for or against it?

The against argument might be something like "God hates things that are unnatural."

[Yadryonych]

Considering possible cost of such procedure you are quite optimistic about your future wealth

[Fencers]

Yes, of course. It seems irresponsible otherwise.

[Nnyco]

I mean yeah, even just pickin the child without an illness is not just a blessing for your child but also your own mental health.

[Ange]

What would be your reasoning for or against it?

Gattaca showed the possible consequences of such technological developments for society.

The abuse of data-mining and the lack of protection against it just 20 years later would paint an even worse future.

[Draco-Onis]

If given the opportunity, would you choose this method over traditional reproduction? What would be your reasoning for or against it?

The fact that these companies have been caught sharing that information with third parties including law enforcement without your consent?

[callipygoustp]

Would you have your baby's genes screened?

Absolutely.

[Rozz]

Hm....it's difficult because I'm of two minds about this.
I think most people when asked "If you can avoid illness/defect in your child, would you?" they'd say yes. For this reason I'd also say yes, but I'm not ignorant to the legitimate concerns surrounding the topic.

[LilSaihah]

If I had the option to give my child not-shit knees I'd take it. Of course I'd take it. I'd be a dick if I didn't.

[Temp name]

It'd create a "haves and have nots" society, at least depending on how expensive it is. The rich would do this, making sure that their kids are all good looking, smart, and healthy, free from all genetic illnesses. At the same time, the poor wouldn't have access to it.

That said, absolutely, and I'd make sure my kid doesn't have any of the shit genes I have

[Daedius]

Yes. Why would I want a child with a congenital disorder if I can prevent it?

[smityx]

Gattaca
/10char

[INVASMANIXOXOXO]

I mean all that Gattaca stuff is scary, but honestly unavoidable... and has already sort of started (down syndrome has been virtually eliminated in Iceland). But messing with our genome at this stage is sort of scary. I am not sure our small monkey brains are ready for it. I don't want to bring religion into this, but if we started to do widespread gene editing etc on our germ line now it would be peak narcisissim/god complex lol. We are all the products of billions of years evolutionary success.

The fact that we have identified a couple A's or C's that show predispositions for alcoholism or cancer honestly doesn't mean shit. There is so much fucking unknown when it comes to this its hard for me to even describe. What makes you a living breathing healthy human being doesn't just come your basic genetic code... there is like a ton of other factors... there are like 5 different types of RNA (which are mostly directly related to your DNA in all fairness), your mitochondrial DNA, the antibodies and shit your mom gives you in her breastmilk, the shit your mom gives you when her vagina spits you out (look this up, they have observed differences in c section vs normal birth), EPIGENETIC INHERITANCE like methylization etc. Also a few years ago we thought like 70%+ of our DNA was junk/useless DNA now we are beginning to think it plays an important role in gene expression etc.

I guess this was just a long winded/uneducated response to say "WE ARE NOT PREPARED!" I guess the sort of worst case scenario I envision is we give everybody 20/20 vision, but 50 years down the road we discover we fucked with a gene we shouldn't have and we are now all sterile lol.

[Jonnusthegreat]

The only answer is yes.

[Seranthor]

Let's say you and your partner had the option to select any number of fertilized eggs made from your sperm/eggs. The doctors could identify the likelihood for genetic disorders, whether the baby will be born with Down Syndrome and even distinguish the embryos based on gender, hair and eyes color. You're given the option to select the embryo of your choice for IVF.

If given the opportunity, would you choose this method over traditional reproduction? What would be your reasoning for or against it?

Where are you going to get the money to pay for this... Certainly this wont be available to everyone (the masses) but only a select few... Certainly that money could be better spent by being redistributed, dont you think?

[PC2]

Where are you going to get the money to pay for this... Certainly this wont be available to everyone (the masses) but only a select few... Certainly that money could be better spent by being redistributed, dont you think?

New technologies typically start at a small scale and cost a lot at first, which means only the rich can afford it on day 1. Then it gets cheaper. The idea that a product/service can't be allowed until everyone can afford it would only serve to stifle sci-tech progress.

[Queen of Hamsters]

I'd screen for disabilities/illnesses, but for eye color? Hair color? Gender? No.

[Seranthor]

New technologies typically start at a small scale and cost a lot at first, which means only the rich can afford it on day 1. Then it gets cheaper. The idea that a product/service can't be allowed until everyone can afford it would only serve to stifle sci-tech progress.

So we, in fact, are willing to accept a stratified society as long as we are the more privileged than the majority. Is that right?