Primarily, one can argue that simply “flushing the other embryos down the drain” is the waste of potential human life. Discarding unwanted embryos is the direct result from embryo selection: when a woman’s eggs …show more content…
are harvested, fertilized with her husband’s sperm, and screened for genetic qualities so that the parents can choose the embryo with the most desirable traits. According to Richard Thomas, as many as 100 fertilized eggs can be screened at one time, which means that the ninety-nine eggs (ninety-eight if they choose to have more than one) that are not chosen to be implanted have the potential of being discarded. However, one who believes that human life begins at conception will argue that embryo selection is immoral because the geneticists carrying out the procedure are, in a sense, killing the dozens of fertilized eggs in which human life has already formed. In addition, one can reason that discouraging the sexual fertilization between certain groups of people, which is the very foundation of eugenics, is not ethical. According to Plato’s Socrates in the Republic, the guardians, who are essentially society’s elite members, are discouraged from having sex with people outside of the elite-class circle, but instead are urged to mate as much as they can with their fellow elitists to produce as many future guardians as possible. A mentality similar to this still exists today. Pro-eugenicists believe that by sterilizing disabled people, they are ultimately purging the negative effects that the undesirable traits will bring about from society. Herein lies the problem: although the people who are free from physical and mental illnesses will be able to live happier lives, the lives of the people who do suffer from these types of illnesses are in jeopardy. If sterilized, they will have to know that they could not have children due to their disability for the rest of their lives. This mentality of cleansing the society of undesirable traits and ignoring the views and lives of the physically and mentally handicapped people is a narrow-minded and inconsiderate thought process. Finally, the act of regarding the physically and mentally disabled as being inferior or second-rate is unethical.
This is best portrayed in the 1997 film Gattaca, where a futuristic dystopian society displays extreme segregation between the genetically-engineered “valids” and the unwanted “invalids,” those born of natural birth. Even after several years of exercise and studying, Vincent, who was born of natural birth, could not change the fact that he was an invalid and resorts to literally changing his identity in order to be accepted into Gattaca. Today’s society is beginning to resemble Gattaca in the sense that the physically and intellectually competent are sometimes looked upon as having more worth or value than one who is not. Although a disabled man might not be able to contribute to a society as much as Albert Einstein did, it does not change the fact that he is still a human being who is just as capable of being appreciated and loved by others. Therefore, labelling a person with disabilities as being “retarded” or “mental” and treating them as an inferior is being dangerously
arrogant. In conclusion, although the idea of a society with only physically and intellectually superior people may sound appealing, the procedures which will be carried out to execute this process are unethical. The disposing of the rejected live human embryos, discouraging the sexual fertilization between certain groups of people, and regarding people with certain physical and mental attributes as being the inferior should not be initiated in order to create a utopian society.