3 ms·

This seems like a reasonable justification but there still the ethical thorn of "the child did not ask/consented to this". If science ethics can get beyond that

This seems like a reasonable justification but there still the ethical thorn of "the child did not ask/consented to this". If science ethics can get beyond that border, then the new standard might be to seek out rare genetic defects throughout the world and attempt treatments in parallel.

bluGill 8y ago
What idiot would not consent to this though? Okay, there might be religious issues - if you believe this will send you to hell I can accept that. I can't think of any other reason that someone would not agree to removing good genes. And since this is my child that we are talking about we can assume the child's values are mine. I carry one of the bad cholesterol genes (I haven't been medically tested but family history suggest it is generic), I'd love to rid it from my kids so they don't need these annoying drugs I take. I'll even take such a treatment myself if it is possible to fix my liver.
- buboard 8y ago
  obviously embryos can't consent that is the problem. I think there is an entire field of philosophy dedicated to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_rights
  - bluGill 8y ago
    Babies cannot consent to vaccines, but it is unethical to not give them to them anyway.
jerf 8y ago
I didn't consent to my current loadout of genes. How would a bundle of genes consent to be some other bundle of genes? What does that even mean?
- buboard 8y ago
  that you didnt have a choice anyway. but theoretically these babies did. of course this is all in ideas territory.
dooglius 8y ago
There is no new ground being broken here; infants already cannot ask or consent to any existing medical procedure, and we have resolved this by asking the parents or legal guardians.
candiodari 8y ago
You must really hate abortion then. At that point not only did the child not consent, we can be VERY sure it would disagree. (and just so you know. The human brain "boots", as in starts processing information and interacting with it's environment, on the 16th day after conception. When the embryo doesn't look remotely human yet, and importantly a solid 5-12 days before even an attentive woman would realize she's pregnant, and therefore presumably before any abortion)

bluGill 8y ago

What idiot would not consent to this though? Okay, there might be religious issues - if you believe this will send you to hell I can accept that. I can't think of any other reason that someone would not agree to removing good genes. And since this is my child that we are talking about we can assume the child's values are mine. I carry one of the bad cholesterol genes (I haven't been medically tested but family history suggest it is generic), I'd love to rid it from my kids so they don't need these annoying drugs I take. I'll even take such a treatment myself if it is possible to fix my liver.

buboard 8y ago
obviously embryos can't consent that is the problem. I think there is an entire field of philosophy dedicated to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_rights
- bluGill 8y ago
  Babies cannot consent to vaccines, but it is unethical to not give them to them anyway.

jerf 8y ago

I didn't consent to my current loadout of genes. How would a bundle of genes consent to be some other bundle of genes? What does that even mean?

buboard 8y ago
that you didnt have a choice anyway. but theoretically these babies did. of course this is all in ideas territory.

dooglius 8y ago

There is no new ground being broken here; infants already cannot ask or consent to any existing medical procedure, and we have resolved this by asking the parents or legal guardians.

candiodari 8y ago

You must really hate abortion then. At that point not only did the child not consent, we can be VERY sure it would disagree. (and just so you know. The human brain "boots", as in starts processing information and interacting with it's environment, on the 16th day after conception. When the embryo doesn't look remotely human yet, and importantly a solid 5-12 days before even an attentive woman would realize she's pregnant, and therefore presumably before any abortion)