|
WILEY BIOTECHNOLOGY ENCYCLOPEDIAS Encyclopedia of Ethical, Legal and Policy Issues in Biotechnology
Editors-in-Chief:
Main Page for this Work
Sample Article
. . . |
2 volume set |
continued from page 4 . . .
Process Assessments. When the issue becomes the process, then intra-normal modifications are as much a subject for examination as enhancements, properly called. Indeed, it might be argued that we only need to examine intra-normal modifications: If an intra-normal modification is unacceptable from the standpoint of process, it would seem that extending that modification to the point of enhancement would also be unacceptable from the standpoint of process. The obverse would also seem to be true, though we should emphasize that acceptability from the standpoint of process does not entail acceptability from the standpoint of product.
The first kind of process assessment is directed at the suggestion is that using biotechnology to effect an improvement is wrong because it is artificial. This concern needn't be one that crudely equates natural with good and non-natural with bad, raising concerns even about ordinary medical interventions. The worry here is a "commodification" of certain traits, and the people who have them, because of their being made to order, so to speak. This type of assessment is often linked with the concern about the humanity of the modification mentioned above.
The second kind of process assessment arises from a concern that using biotechnology in order to effect an improvement undermines the value of the improvement. The value we place on certain achievements may depend upon the struggle and effort required to achieve them. If they could be made effortless - at least on the part of the individual - and common, we might well cease to value them. As we noted earlier, some (genetic) enhancements may only result in enhanced capacities; realizing them may still require effort, discipline, and luck on the part of the individual. Is the kind of effort relevant to the value we place on certain achievements?
The third kind of process assessment is directed at the suggestion that using biotechnology to enhance people is not the sort of thing physicians should do. The values or aims of the medical profession are held to be incompatible with performing enhancements. This can be a parochial concern in that a judgment that physicians should not perform enhancements leaves the question of the ethics of enhancement untouched. One can consistently be a supporter of capital punishment and yet hold that physicians should not be involved in either administering lethal injections or making the official pronouncement of death. In order to make this type of assessment have broader significance, an argument that any profession that provides enhancements has suspect aims or values.
REFERENCES
Allen, David and Norman Fost (1990). "Growth Hormone Therapy for Short Stature: Panacea or Pandora's Box?" Journal of Pediatrics 117:16-21.
Boorse, Christopher (1977). "Health as a Theoretical Concept" Philosophy of Science, 44:542-73.
Parens, Erik, (1998). Enhancing Human Traits: Ethical and Social Implications. Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C.
Wachbroit, Robert (1994). "Normality as a Biological Concept" Philosophy of Science 61:579-91.
Walters, Leroy and Judy Palmer (1997). Ethical Issues in Human Gene Therapy. Oxford University Press, New York.
Human Enhancement Uses of Biotechnology: Overview
By Robert Wachbroit
<<<Back - - - 1 2 3 4 5 - - - Next >>>>