Sunday, February 23, 2014

A Petri Dish Dystopia

The idea of manipulating life is not news to the public. Our imaginations have expanded with stories of Prometheus, Golem, Frankenstein, Dolly, and the most successful, in vitro fertilization. This process combines DNA from an egg and sperm, both isolated from the human body, and incubates the fetus into a human womb. IVF revives the dream for couples who desire children yet are unable to conceive. In their hands, in vitro fertilization becomes an appreciated miracle, an end to the wave of disappointments. Yet what happens when this unnatural process falls into greedy hands? Parents who scroll through Surrogate Mothers Online, "an eBay for genetic material" (Cohen 117) and fix upon the sole purpose of creating a"chef d'oeuvre" (Cohen 119) are no better than picky readers who meander through libraries, a massive pool of knowledge, and only gravitate towards one perspective of books. In both cases, this limited perspective may snowball into detrimental effects, such as eugenics or a prejudiced, intolerant individual. A perfect child is strikingly similar to Frankenstein's monster: both are created by independently chosen body parts to construct an ideal human. However, the success rate of a perfect child is far greater than Victor Frankenstein's monster. Technology, developing at a fiery rate, enables parents to choose which DNA samples to use through a process called genetic mapping. Essentially, we can create humans by selecting desired characteristics and even prevent genetic disorders "if [we] can afford it" (Cohen 119). Perhaps the best representation of the dire ends parents will go to to create a masterpiece is Graham's Repository for Germinal Choice, better known as the Nobel Prize sperm bank. In vitro fertilization is not criticized for its unnatural production of life; rather, people argue against its "$2-billion-a-year infertility industry" (Cohen 116). If left unchecked, there may come a day where no child is born naturally, but is instead chosen based on his traits, perhaps creating an in vivo Brave New World.

1 comment:

  1. Hm. Did we discuss Cohen's story this week? Or are we allowed to comment on whatever we've discussed in the past... Drats!

    Anyway. I personally don't believe that "unnatural" productions of life are necessarily to be frowned upon (ie old, infertible couples deserve the opportunity of child-rearing), but simply the fact that some processes give the parents way too much control over the outcome of their child. In the beautiful miracle of life, there is bound to be risk, bound to be disappointment, but that's what makes it beautiful, no? Life isn't beautiful for any ne plus ultra of genetic traits in a weird sperm-egg cocktail, but instead because it humbles us into the realization that the ideal doesn't exist.

    ReplyDelete