In the last lecture we
talked about how technology made it possible to either genetically prevent
someone from being born with a disability. It is also in some cases possible
for someone to use technology to replace lost abilities, or at least allow
people to be independent. The security expert Mr. Ng in Snow Crash is a prime
example of that. Even today, one can point today to almost totally paralyzed
people, unable to even speak, whose lives are far better because of interfaces
they have to communicate and control the environment around them using sensors
on the person connected to computers.
We also talked about how
parents might decide to engineer out certain characteristics from their child
that are not traditionally considered diseases (attention deficit
disorder, aggression, baldness, myopia). We also considered how parents might
also choose to engineer certain enhanced qualities into their children
(height, math ability, strength, etc.) because other parents who can afford to
have such techniques done are already doing so and they don’t want their child
to be disadvantaged. In addition, consider this, if everyone’s child is
engineered to be what we now consider to be tall, strong, and smart, then
having those characteristics stops distinguishing the child from other kids.
The traits are relative ones, in that they only matter in comparison with other
people. Such an unending search for advantage might eventually lead parents to
start engineering superhuman traits in their children.
The reasons for wanting to
genetically enhance one’s children probably go beyond that. Some people have
suggested that part of the reason people have children is to out of a
semi-conscious desire to continue to exist as if one’s child is one’s contribution
to the world, an extension of oneself that lives on. Evidence for this argument
appears in cases where parents try to shape (and sometimes coerce) their
children into becoming something the parent wanted to become in their own life,
but could not. The fact that any person would actually consider helping others
to clone themselves (as a few fertility doctors have) also suggests that there
is something to this argument.
Children, especially as they
get older, have the power to resist being made into an extension of the parent,
or demand a change in their parents’ expectations and to become what the child
chooses to be. But when if will of the
parent to shape the child is inscribed in the genetic makeup of the child with
the help of engineers, that child’s freedom to resist shaping and be their own
person is eroded.
Remember in “Gattaca” how
Vincent said that his brother had “No excuse to fail” in their endurance
swimming contests. That was because of his brother’s genetic engineering
supposedly gave him an insurmountable advantage. For his brother to fail to
demonstrate superior endurance in the race would have marked him as lazy and
underachieving. He would not be living up to the potential of the genetic
advantages his parents bought for him at substantial expense. A more extreme
version of such pressure drove Jerome (Vincent’s “borrowed ladder”) to attempt
suicide, paralyzing himself in the process.
So what are some social
effects of technologies for modifying the process of having children?
Artificial Insemination and
In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) remove the moment of conception to outside of the
woman’s body. This makes several things possible which were not possible
before, each of which can change the traditional legal and moral circumstances
of a child’s birth.
The woman who delivers the
child might not be the person who’s egg the baby was grown from This could be
because the woman is acting as a surrogate mother or because the woman
was given a fertilized egg which (unknown to her) is not her own. Similarly,
even if the egg is her own, there is no guarantee that the sperm used is that
of her partner or of the donor the couple selected. There was a case of a
fertility doctor in Virginia using his own sperm instead of, as the couples
were told, that of anonymous donors.
The most common and normal
effect of these techniques is that they allow older women to have children by
overcoming the reduced fertility that comes with age. This will mean that,
especially in the social classes that can afford IVF, the median age difference
between child and parent will increase over time are more women near 40 bear
children. There will also be more instances of multiple births such as twins
because of a side-effect of implanting multiple fertilized eggs in order to get
one to survive. In a few cases these will be large-multiple births like
septuplets (seven babies) which will impose significant costs to the health
care system when they occur and the mothers will not abort some of the fetuses
despite all the severe medical risks of trying to deliver that many children.
Moving the moment of
conception outside the body already allows parents to easily choose the gender
of their child by letting technicians select the sperm cells which will result
in the desired gender of the child. This has been going on for some time. In
countries where there are powerful combinations of economic and cultural
reasons for parents to want male over female children (such as China and India)
those parents who can afford it have been selecting boys for some time.
An interesting demographic
effect of this has been that as all these selected boys reach adulthood they
find that there are a lot fewer women of their age to choose from. This has
allowed women in that age group (or their parents arranging the marriage) to be
pickier about potential husbands and to demand lower “dowry” payments from the
bride’s family to the husband’s family. Both of these have been empowering to
women in that class and age group, and have raised their status somewhat.
At the same time, many men
in that class and age group in places like India and China are finding it
harder to get married or even find girlfriends. There are a number of potential
consequences of that frustration at finding a mate, both positive and
negative. One of those effects that
outsiders believe is positive is that some men are breaking long traditions of
only marrying inside of the husband’s particular social groups based on region,
ethnicity, religion, or class/caste.
© Shayne Weyker, 2003