The positive eugenic engineering or altering genes by encouraging an increase in the desirable gene would be desirable in the short-term but would bring adverse effects in the long run. In the case of making our children smarter or better looking, it would create a kind of stigma to those children whose genes cannot be enhanced because they cannot afford it. When the eugenic engineering is being done to eliminate bad genes then that would be a good thing to everyone. Taking the example where a genetic enhancement is done to prevent a child from being aggressive, this enhancement would see a decrease in crimes since they would have been dealt with during its early stages (Searle, 1995).
The responsibility on determining the type of eugenic engineering that should be done on a patient should be left to the doctor or any medical practioner after a careful assessment of the patient. If the patient is grown up then he/she should have the final say. If the patient is a child then parents or the guardian should approve the procedure.
I would strongly recommend for legislation for any human genetic manipulation because if legislation is not put in place the procedure would be misused rather than bring joy to the human race.
Defining whether the procedure to be performed is appropriate and what is not will be defined by the legislation that will be put in place and the doctor’s report after careful scrutiny. If the procedure to be performed is to satisfy once personal need then it should be done because it will be misusing the procedure.
Begley, S. (2008). Good gene, bad gene. London UK: The Rosen Publishing Group
Searle, R. (1995). Eliminating bad gene. New York NY: University of Victoria (B.C.).