vation in the field of reproductive technology brings relief and happiness to parents”. I do not agree. I do not see how sex selection is a good thing. There is no evidence that this advancement can benefit anyone. “Opponents of sex selection are concerned that allowing couples to determine the sex of their children will perpetuate gender stereotyping and discrimination, upset the world of ratio of men to women…” As I see it, parents are spoiling themselves if they choose this procedure. They cannot be happy with what they could create, but rather have technology interfere with an act that should be personal to the parents. Also, this kind of “technology is liable to produce results that may have unfortunate consequences for society and for our species”. As with any type of manipulation, such as surgery or with genes, no matter how sure the doctors are about the procedure, there are bound to be complications. And I do not believe that children should pay the price if something fatal was to occur. I would only agree with this if a father needed to carry out his name, but did not have a son to do so with, and did not have any brothers that could do so if he could not. But this is a rare case, and not very likely. Children are people, not possessions that can be trades if they were not wanted.Scientists at Princeton, MIT, and Washington University found a way to genetically alter a mouse. The mouse was engineered so that it learned “more quickly, remembers what it learns for a longer period of time and adapts to changes in its environment more flexibly than a normal mouse” . People who are for this innovation say that since “[scientists’] results suggest that the genetic enhancement of mental and cognitive attributes such as intelligence and memory in mammals is feasible”, then parents can choose to make their child smarter. Memory is an important thing. Parent...
