Project 3 Outline

In this post I will construct an outline for Project 3, which is writing an argument on the controversy of designer babies in an op-ed.

Introduction (define or narrow the problem)

• Hook: When the term "designer babies" is thrown out in the news people automatically picture a glowing newborn baby with bright blue eyes. These type of articles regurgitate the common pro con arguments to the designer baby controversy. The supporters emphasize the possible medical breakthroughs that the technology of designer babies (gene editing) can create. The opponents argue that immorality and unknown risks outweigh the positives. 
• Transition: I am going to expand on the argument against designer babies and further convince my audience that designer babies are wrong and inspire them to act to prevent designer babies from becoming a reality. 
• Thesis: The high cost of designer babies will create societal conflicts because only an select group of wealthy people can afford it. Gene editing is immoral because it only serves to enhance traits and reproductive technology already exists to prevent genetic disease. 

Body Paragraphs

1. Major supporting arguments

• high cost of reproductive technology- in-vitro fertilization (IVF), pre-implantation genetic  diagnosis (PGD), and egg and sperm donors
• the gene editing technology of designer babies will cost a lot too like all of these reproductive technologies 
• don't need gene editing to prevent hereditable diseases, GDP can do this
• only the wealthy class can afford because costs are not covered by insurance companies
• separates upper and lower class further
• creates another discriminating factor that interferes with society's progress towards equality

2. Major criticisms

• The price could decrease as more technologies become available to public and more mainstream
• The technology of gene editing can still be used for medicine and not designer babies
• The market of reproductive technology will make it hard to prevent designer babies

3. Select key support and rebuttal points

• high cost to technology of designer babies: the price could decrease before the technology is available to public
• separates upper and lower classes further: ability to cure diseases outweighs the negative societal effects
• designer babies creates another discriminating factor: market of reproductive technology will make it hard to prevent designer babies

4. Topic sentence for each 

• As shown by the high costs of IVF treatment, only the wealthy class will be able to afford the technology of designer babies, and therefore the gap between upper and lower classes will increase. 
• Designer baby children will have unfair advantages that creates an additional discriminating factor, which impedes society's goal towards equality. 
• Technology already exists to prevent genetic diseases, so genetic editing would only serve to enhance and perfect traits which is immoral. 

5. Evidence

• By spending staggering amounts of money, as much as $100,000, picky parents would soon be able to design superior physical, mental and psychological attributes for their babies-to-be
• As reproductive technologies push the envelope of possibilities, they . . . will blur the edges of what is now formally forbidden: cloning, fetal research," Harvard economist Debora L. Spar writes in her book "The Baby Business." 
• Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, one of the biggest scientific advancements, costs $3,000 to $5,000. That's on top of the $10,000-to-$15,000 price for in vitro fertilization.
• Who wouldn't want to give their child every advantage possible in an increasingly competitive world? 
• Even if the cost of this extra genetic screening comes down, the overall procedure is probably going to be out of reach for many Americans, let alone other countries around the world.
• Imagine a scenario at a future Olympics: is it legitimate to have a genetically designed person competing against those who are not? At the moment, it's a bit of luck who has the right body for certain sports. But in the future, those traits could be selected for and groomed from the womb.
• But if we think the gap between the haves and have-nots is large now, just wait until this technology is used to pre-select characteristics for success.
• Genetic modifications of sperm, eggs and early embryos should be strictly off limits. Otherwise, we risk venturing into human experimentation and high-tech eugenics.
• ...argue that any genetic modification of embryos should be verboten. “Otherwise, we risk venturing into human experimentation and high-tech eugenics,” Darnovsky writes in a New York Times op-ed.
• There are safer and more dependable methods for preventing the birth of a child with a severe genetic abnormality than by genetic modification of the germ cells. The use of prenatal screening or pre-implantation embryo diagnosis will suffice in most cases to prevent the birth of a genetically abnormal embryo.
• The greatest danger of a belief in genetic engineering lies in its likely social impact. Eugenics will inevitably be used by those with wealth and power to make others believe that prenatal genetic modification makes people better. 

6.  Map of Argument

• Here is a link to a Coggle of my argument. 

Conclusion (call to action/future of the debate)

• Motivate the audience to speak up and voice there opinions against designer babies. Convince the NIH and FDA that the technology of gene editing is not beneficial to humankind. 
• There are more moral ways to go about improving human life and gene editing is an option that is too risky and has too many negative consequences. 
• ADD MORE!

Oberholster, Venita. "Silhouette." 6 Oct. 2015 via Pixabay. Creative Comons. 

Reflection:
I read Jenny and Addie's Project 3 outlines and both did a really great job developing all of their ideas. After meeting with Mr. Bottai in class I have come up with a new direction I am going to approach my argument with, so this current outline does not really apply to my project any more. I am going to go through this process for my new argument, but It was too much work to completely redo my Project 3 Outline post. The future blog posts will be adapted to my new argument. Some major changes are that I am going to focus on the reproductive technology available currently and how these procedures already allow for some type of "designer baby". Also, this argument will be an evaluative argument of how successful these procedures satisfy the designer baby debate.