Should anyone have kids? (Genetics)

Discussion in 'Debate Corner' started by Sara, Oct 21, 2013.

  1. Sara Tea Drinker

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Wherever the wind takes me.
    340
    Yes, we all know there are families who have kids who can't even afford an apple for themselves. That's an issue for another day.

    Recently me and my mom have been talking about this a lot, so I got curious about other people's opinions.

    Do you think that there should be more of a selection on who has kids based on genetics?

    With allergies, autism and a ton of other things on the rise, do you think it should be more controlled to slow down the genetic defects carried?

    Take myself, I come from a family that from both sides carry toxemia (a problem with pregnancy that can kill you), autism, cancer, schizophrenia, mental illness, staph, cancer and a slew of other problems. Both sides of my family carry this gene, and my brother has autism while I have a slew of medical and mental problems wrong. My brother has a kid right now who luckily missed so far all of these problems.
     
  2. Patman Bof

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    France
    672
    It' s the other way around. Genetic diversity is a strength, not a weakness. The more diverse our genetic pool is the more situations we can survive as a species. What might look like a curse to you might be a blessing in disguise. Eugenism would have the same consequences as inbreeding, which it essentially is.

    It' d be quite long and possibly boring to explain the why and the how, but on a slightly different note you might want to watch Welcome to Gattaca, if you haven' t already (hell of a movie).
     
  3. Ienzo ((̲̅ ̲̅(̲̅C̲̅r̲̅a̲̅y̲̅o̲̅l̲̲̅̅a̲̅( ̲̅̅((>

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    In your breadbin
    2,762

    Yeah, I love that film! But yeah I agree with Patman, a simple example is monoculture. When a farmer plants all the same crop in one field that is great but they can easily be wiped out by a disease or something- the same can be said for genetics in humans- if we genetically bottleneck ourselves then something could easily come along and kill all of us but diversity is a strength and that is why there is so much variety and swapping over of genetics during meiosis and why random genetic mutations happen- they help the species grow.

    However, I do see what you are saying but I don't think it would ever be so strict that only certain people could have children as that would lead to designer babies (that links in with Gattaca!) and that's a whole other can of worms that I won't touch on. Even if these genetics were cut out they would find their way back in some way, there are just too many variables, or new mutations will come around which could be so much worse. Genetic diseases are something we can never stop completely even with 100% control which is unethical and robotises us all.
     
  4. KeybladeSpirit [ENvTuber] [pngTuber]

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Gender:
    Girl ️‍⚧️
    Location:
    College
    2,178
    The way I see it, anyone who wants to have children and survives long enough to do so should be allowed to. Reproducing is the whole point of being alive, after all. To put it another way, anyone who doesn't die before they get a chance should be allowed to reproduce because passing on one's genes is the whole point of living. I'd be okay with requiring men and women of certain ages who don't want kids to donate to sperm and egg banks a couple of times a year, but that's neither feasible nor practical at this point in time, not to mention the fact that it's really unethical from a "FREEDOM LIBERTY GUNS APPLE PIE" standpoint.
     
  5. Peace and War Bianca, you minx!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Gender:
    Cisgender Male
    1,282
    But having a familial history of illnesses doesn't suppose that they will be inherited by the offspring. What I mean is that in a lot of these cases, genes being passed down to the child isn't the cause of the affliction.

    If both my parents have schizophrenia, it doesn't mean I will get it. I might be more likely to develop schizophrenia, but it's extremely rare to find such obvious genetic relationship. Like you say, your family history is that list of illnesses or conditions, but you don't have all of them, and even if you did, you won't necessarily have them to the same degree as your family.

    Like Patman says, a wider gene pool is more desirable since they have a lot of adaptability and resistance. Policing breeding of humanity is a concept explored in The Handmaid's Tale, and while a lot of other problems are occurring or happened, it shows a lot about the massive trouble it is to handle. Just wouldn't be possible to keep it all in check. Let it flow free then.