Incredible advances in reproductive and genetic technologies will soon provide prospective parents with the ability to enhance their embryos so that their children can be born with new genes that they themselves do not carry.
This technological leap into "reprogenetics" will be the most important in the history of humankind because it could change the very nature of the human species. There is much debate about both the science and the ethics of human germ line genetic engineering. Some scientists claim it will never be possible to develop the technology for use in a safe way. Many bioethicists believe that even if safety concerns are overcome, it is still unacceptable to "tamper" with a child's genes, even to combat disease.
I will argue that recent scientific advances leave no doubt about future technical feasibility. I argue, as well, that the major objections raised by bioethicists are logically inconsistent or based on narrow religious beliefs. Instead, I believe the fundamental ethical dilemma is rooted in the conflict between individual autonomy and social equality. Principles of social equality might lead a society to reject the use of a technology that could greatly widen the gap between affluent and non-affluent families.
In America, however, principles of individual autonomy and non-interference into private transactions are paramount. The market-driven American fertility industry would have much to gain financially by incorporating reprogenetics into its repertoire of offerings. Each individual use of the technology may have no effect on society at large. But when genetic enhancements accumulate from one generation to the next, the gap between affluent and non-affluent segments of humanity could widen unimaginably until our species commonality is irrevocably severed.
