The parental love argument against ‘designing’ babies: The harm in knowing that one has been selected or enhanced

Anca Gheaus*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to Book/Report typesChapterpeer-review

Abstract (may include machine translation)

In this chapter, I argue that children who were selected for particular traits or genetically enhanced might feel, for this reason, less securely, spontaneously and fairly loved by their parents, which would constitute significant harm. ‘Parents’ refers, throughout this chapter, to the people who perform the social function of rearing children, rather than to procreators. I rely on an understanding of adequate parental love which includes several characteristics: parents should not make children feel they are loved conditionally, for features such as intelligence, looks or temperament; they should not burden children with parental expectations concerning particular achievements of the child; and parental love is often expressed in spontaneous enjoyment and discovery of children’s features. This understanding of parental love provides a reason to question the legitimacy of parental use of selection and enhancement and to explain why parents should not engage on a quest for the ‘best child’.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Right to Know and the Right Not to Know
Subtitle of host publicationGenetic Privacy and Responsibility
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages151-164
Number of pages14
ISBN (Electronic)9781139875981
ISBN (Print)9781107076075
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The parental love argument against ‘designing’ babies: The harm in knowing that one has been selected or enhanced'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this