Professor, Anton and Vincent discussed on Life of the Law

Life of the Law
|

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

True. I had to sequenced. I read your profile. I'm sorry. She looks down remorsefully. Seems everything they say you are and more. To. I read your engineer just like the rest is not like. Best unacceptable likelihood of heart failure. I think that's what the manual says. The only chip I'll take in space around the sun in the satellite right here. That first nights discussion following, the screening really came down to crisper and the realms of possibility. It opens up in terms of affecting the human germline germline is the series of cells containing genetic information that result in the formation of either an egg or sperm cell. So my name is Caitlyn Kline. I am an intern. I see. She S and I'm a student at UC Berkeley studying biology, a big thing that I'm interested in. Just making sure that that germline doesn't get edited. Interventions somatic, which is basically means that you are doing intervention that simply affects your body individual and then they're germline. But those are inventions to the game meets. Again, he is an egg or sperm cell one of each need to come together to form zygote. Does I go then splits up and becomes an embryo. Those interventions will be carried out and all future generations. So not only are impacting the resulting tile, then child's children and so on and so on. So that resist different questions. Because at that point you're not simply making a decision about one individual. You make decisions about all future generations and society at large. Germline editing goes beyond genetic assessment. According to professor boss, Icke changes the genetic makeup of embryos so that any alterations affect not only the resulting person, but all subsequent generations of people related to the once altered embryo. This is where soggy and the center for genetics and society draw the line there fine with limited forms of prenatal and postnatal testing, but believe that germline editing opens up a host of other issues. So right now, Andrea, you and I can have our Uni analyzed through a few companies like twenty three and me ancestry dot com. And new companies are springing up left and right claiming to be able to do things like pair wines your DNA profile or even DNA matchmaking. In fact, during the panel professor Troy duster as the audience who had gotten their DNA analyzed. Show of hands of those who have set in their sample to some company. About one in eight people raise their hands. If you get your DNA analyzed one of these companies, you can make decisions about your health based on the data you get back. It's a burgeoning practice amongst doctors while nece coaches, dieticians, etc. And concept we came across in our research was informed consent. If you and I get our DNA analyzed, we would opt into this knowledge and we then have the choice to make decisions about our health. Sounds good, right? But what about the rights of an unborn child. Was this meat for children? So oftentimes we focus on the role and rights of parents, but we often aglet future people, either children who are involved as some point, you know, we have to think about and consider the rights of the child. Does future child have the right to be born without some type of intervention. Cut to Anton and ungainly Vincent running on the beach toward the ocean. By the time we were playing at blood brothers. I understood that there was something very different flowing through my veins and I need an awful lot more than a drop. If I was going to get anywhere Anton takes the shell and holds it up to his own thumb, but hesitates before throwing the shell till the sand. They swim into an endless expanse of water, Vincent floats on his back, an expert in not drowning. We allow parents to make decisions on behalf of children all the time, and we'll do that up until they're eighteen years old. And sometimes it happens a lot longer after, right, but for most bar law not only allows, but compels parents to make certain decisions for the benefit of the children. There's dad include genetic interventions in terms of type of ability to make decisions on a baffled children, or should children be thought of as having the right to be able to be free for what some people say, non health related genetic and eventually to sent that they may not be in the children's best interests. That's an open question right. My name's Lisa Newman. I am a PHD candidate and sociology at UC Santa Barbara. I think that's one of the concerns with the growth of the technologies around Nettie testing and screening is that they're kind of always seen as a positive. And in the same ways that we see in the movie like, why wouldn't you do this to give your children in advantage? You're almost doing a disservice to not take advantage of these things available to you when you're making reproductive decisions in terms of the commercial Power and commercial interests in marketing these technologies and making them more available. I don't see a lot of ways that we're kind of protected or even resisting this future. We're kind of offering it in and asking the moral questions later, the questions become, do we have a right to be born without someone making decisions about the type of person that we become the discussion on this night alluded to some heavy topics among them early twentieth century jenex. So historically says, taken on at least two forms. So. One negative eugenic stud is the weeding out of certain populaces that are deemed to not be up to par. So examples of negative jenex would include genocide or other forms of segregation to keep certain populations away from the populations that are being be more productive, more pure. Curious, director and vantage.

Coming up next