The recent developments in technological advancements and scientific breakthroughs have presented modern ways of creating new things and doing things. One such development relates to the introduction of technology-based medical procedures, which have made it possible to achieve feats that yesteryear medical scientists could only dream about. The field of medicine has shown tremendous improvement as a result of the incorporation of new technological meth-ods into the field of medicine. Genetic engineering procedures have become common not only in the creation of medicines and vaccines but also in disease management before and after birth. Scientists have come up with ways in which they can study the embryo before they are born and in cases of any congenital defects using certain measures to reduce the chances of the child being born with those defects. Technological advancement, especially through Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has played a role in the treatment of children with conditions such as leukemia (Belkin). PGD involves the screening of embryos for any case of a disease and analyzes the possibility of finding a suitable healthy implant. However, debates have been raised whether controversial medical procedures should be allowed to play their role in the society without external interference and whether they are ethically accepted in the society. In Lisa Belkin’s article, “The Made-To-Order Savior,” she describes how modern medical technology makes it possible to involve genetic screening in selective in-vitro fertilization so as to increase the chances of donor matching in saving Fanconi anemic children’s lives. She presents a story of a couple, the Nashes, who have a child born with Fanconi Anemia. Fanconi anemia is a life-threatening genetic disorder that usually leads to cancers of the blood such as leukemia and lymphomas and other cancers through the failure of the bone marrow. It is only corrected through bone marrow transplants by finding a matching donor (Belkin). Lisa Belkin presents this family’s struggle to find health for their child Molly. They go through several trials of IVF (In-vitro fertilization) without success but later they succeed in finding help for Molly. This procedure has elicited ethical controversy as the implied benefits are compared with the general societal implications. On the same level, the relationship between fundamentalism and the approaches adapted by society is explored in depth by Berry Wendell in the essay “God, Science, and Imagination,” where the concept of fundamentalism with regard to common societal concerns is explored. He is concerned about the ways fundamentalists of science and religion evangelize societal concerns to a point of championing the implementation of ideas and upholding of philosophies without due regard to what it means for society to take such prescriptions without asking questions. Berry believes that fundamentalists seek to satisfy their narrow pursuits and are unconcerned about the effects that their ideas have on the wider society. He quotes several famous scientists that have used their successes to raise questions on issues of life and religion, the relation between them and how they affect each other. He quotes Steven Weinberg, for example, who says that even though sciences such as chemistry and physics are helping to make life better, they have caused more problems to the world. Weinberg says that chemistry has poisoned the whole world, and physics has littered the whole world with problems that cannot be remedied (Berry 181). As he looks at these, he has the same concerns for genetic engineering and says that it also contributes to serious problems that may not be easy to solve at the end of the day. It may look appealing in one way but this may result in more complications that are serious. In both articles, the critical concept of permitting the application of controversial medical procedures is investigated. Although scientific breakthroughs and technological advancements provide opportunities for advancing the search for modern solutions to the challenges facing humanity, there should be an ordered and regulated uptake of the associated methods and recommendations. The human penchant for the trial of new approaches based on personal beliefs should not be allowed to mislead the process of ascertaining that medical discoveries are applied in the best interest of saving lives and protecting the society’ moral and ethical fabric. Several concerns are even raised over the IVF procedure and one says that giving birth to another baby to save one is against the Kantian principle that says that people are not to be used as a way to other people’s ends, and so this procedure is unethical and socially unacceptable.
There are pertinent concerns regarding the procedure of allowing medical discoveries to be available for widespread consumption, and the ethical discussions surrounding how the society should respond to the related approaches. Belkin’s article demonstrates the concerns emanating from those who are directly affected by medical situations. Her focus on the processes followed by families in the pursuit of saving the lives of loved ones appears to shed some light on how to approach the discourse on controversial medical procedures. She looks at how desperate parents are to give life to their children, and they are willing to go through any procedure that may seem promising. Many parents go through several trials of IVF to save their children. Despite the many failure rates, they are always ready to try it out any time they hear of any likelihood of success. On one hand, the author considers the pain and suffering associated with Fanconi anemia and describes a relentless search for scientific help (Belkin). To demonstrate the affected families’ situation, she describes one family as believing that “Having seen the devastation wrought by the disease on one of their children; they refuse to allow it to claim another” (5). This introduces an important viewpoint in that when the situation is considered through the eyes of the affected, the prolonged debate on whether it is right or wrong to seek the intervention of controversial procedures does not seem to hold water. To some, this procedure is not ethical and should not be encouraged, but looking through the eyes of the parents that are desperate to en-sure that their children are well it means something different. Some even view that even the woman’s eggs that fail in the trials are unethical as they consider that there is life in those eggs, and the failure can be equated to taking away of the life of an innocent child. This is, however, questionable. The statement highlights the families’ worry after witnessing the tormenting experience that their child went through. This family exemplifies the dilemma that the society goes through under these unethical procedures. The biggest concern even develops with the fact that these procedures are often on even able to save the situation. Berry presents the problems brought forth and says that even science in itself is not able to answer all the questions put forth. He contrasts this when he talks about religious fundamentalism and says that belief in itself is not enough to prove everything; there is need of fact about everything including the existence of God (Berry 182). He appreciates the problems associated with fundamentalists and writes, “They all seek power – they seek victory, in fact – by abandoning the priorities that permit us to seek and honor what is true while acknowledging the limits of our ability to know.” (Berry 22). This statement serves to indicate support to Belkin’s claims that people directly involved in or affected by situations have troubles in evaluating the right thing to do, but they still try all means possible to make things work. It may seem dim on one hand, but on the other hand, there is always hope that there is a possibility of things working out right. The much knowledge confines the so-called experts to make the right judgment; instead, they aim at their personal pursuit and leave others no place to oppose. Characteristically, society is full of similar examples where people, by the social merits derived by the communities, use their influence to lead others in their directions. They usually do believe that they have the help that these people involved in or affected by certain situations desperately need and they into the situation as their savior only to realize their incapability later on. It is possible that when such actions are undertaken, evaluation on whether it was the right thing to do usually takes place after the action in question has already been accomplished. This may imply that even when there is no explicit operational framework guided by procedure and laws, it is the society to champion a social and moral framework that influences how emergencies and innovations should be dealt with and introduced to the community. Every situation should be analyzed objectively and if possible, the decision made should always be the best that was suitable for that particular situation. A list of alternatives should possibly be considered, and the one that stands as the best and is socially and ethically acceptable should be considered. The danger with this situation relates to the lack of impartiality of those affected especially because of the personal and emotional involvement.
History demonstrates that for a long time society has heavily relied on a moral framework that underlines the critical aspects of allowing actions to take place only if they do not unsettle the existing delicate relationships and comply with certain norms. To highlight these concerns, Belkin cites the ethicists’ concern that “If we can screen an embryo for tissue type, won’t we one day screen for eye color or intelligence?” (Belkin 2). This common scientific breakthrough talk seems to have illuminated ethical discussion as being unfair, and this is considered to propose the acceptance of medical procedures based on the contributions they make to the lives of those who have first-hand experiences of their effects. Through this statement, Belkin warns against practicing scientific procedures blindly. In essence, the scholar reminds us to think of the ethical considerations that characterize these procedures. It is apparent that scientific knowledge can act as a key tool for addressing challenges that the society face. However, it is unchallengeable that scientific knowledge can be characterized with various issues and problems, which highlights the significance of remaining mindful of ethical concerns. Similarly, Berry’s claims introduce a consideration based on fundamentalism, “ Scientists and scholars in the knowledge industry—corporate or academic, if there is a differences—are probably in the greatest moral jeopardy of anybody except the political, military, and corporate leader”(Berry 27). There is a balance between science and moral. To make the fundamental choices during medical situations, those involved may be inclined to look beyond the moral provisions, or the simplistic justifications as may be availed through science. This may imply that even when there is no explicit operational framework guided by procedure and laws, it is the society to champion a social and moral framework that influences how emergencies and innovations should be dealt with and introduced to the community. Berry’s statements brings about a unique assertion that of great significance when thinking of the issue ethics in relation to medical procedures. The scholar introduces the idea of politics and other social forces that may jeopardize the practice of ethical standards. Berry notes that political and other social forces have the potential of corrupting the opinions of the scientists and academicians. This is detrimental as the patients or the society will eventually be the victims of such corrupt undertakings.
Works cited
Belkin, Lisa. The made-to-order savior: Producing a perfect baby sibling. New York Times. July 1, 2001.
Berry, Wendell. Imagination in Place. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication, 2010. Print
