If you could, would you modify your unborn child's genetics to make the child ta

1. 64

   leroy64posted 11 years ago

   If you could, would you modify your unborn child's genetics to make the child taller?
   
   By tall, I mean over 5'-8", I think that is average in the US.  I don't think this is possible at this time, but the question intrigues me. 
   
   

   replyreport
2. 66

   maddotposted 11 years ago

   If we are going to get into modifying I'm not sure height would be on the top of my hit list. If we are going to modify I'd  be looking more at genes affecting mental capacities eg a mental illness
   
   Good question..provokes food for thought

   replyreport
   1. 64

      leroy64posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with your priorities; but, I am not convinced that everyone does.  I might be a little jaded.

      replyreport
   2. 77

      teaches12345posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree, there are other modifications, such as health, I would choose over height.

      replyreport
3. 61

   duffsmomposted 11 years ago

   No, I wouldn't mess with genetics. My husband is 6'4" so our girls are tall.
   
   But if I married a short man I would assume my children might be short and there is nothing wrong with being short.  I think messing with genetics may come at a huge cost.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      leroy64posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I like that you brought up the issue of consequences.  I don't think we will ever actually know what the true costs of genetic modification until someone goes through with it.

      replyreport
4. 60

   Maggie Bennettposted 11 years ago

   I guess that depends on the circumstances.  I know a child who had his legs lengthened and it was a long painful process.  However he may reach five feet now. 
   
   Having a girl who is only five feet tall isn't a problem, however for guys that might be a severe blow.  Being a parent is a tough hoe under the best conditions.  If this modification came with no cost I would, but since this is virgin territory I might be a bit tentative.  I would need to do a lot of soul searching before saying yes or no.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      leroy64posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I have read about that type of  operation.  Personally, I would rather stay at my current height of 5'-6", than go through that.

      replyreport
5. 85

   sparkleyfingerposted 11 years ago

   Im gonna answer this in a strange way..... my brother was the opposite. he had too much growth hormone as a child, and my parents were encouraged to give him meds to inhibit the growth hormone, therefore make him shorter... the choice was made to let him be... allow nature to take it's course, and i think that same should be said for making someone taller. At the end of the day, if people want to make fun of you, whether you're tall or short, it will happen anyway.
   To answer any curiosity, he is now 6ft 4 or thereabouts... size 13 feet... quite big! lol

   replyreport
   1. 64

      leroy64posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The answer was not so strange.  A similar situation, and the reasons behind the decision.

      replyreport
6. 59

   tirelesstravelerposted 11 years ago

   So we are going to decide a child isn't good enough even before they are born?  If everyone is tall and smart who will do the lowly stuff?  Height is an attitude. 
   When my favorite middle son was four he said to his 5 foot tall grandmother who was trying to reach something on a shelf, "It must be awful to be short", then he climbed on the counter and got what she was reaching for.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      leroy64posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Interesting.  I never said anything about smart.  Just tall.  I like your story.  I am kind of surprised that no one has said they would do it, so far.

      replyreport
7. 71

   Anselomeposted 11 years ago

   The only reason that I would modify my unborn child's genes if I could would be to prevent a disability or illness. I would want my child to have the best life possible. If they aren't tall, that's completely inconsequential. However, if I knew that my child was going to be healthy and that they would not be tall (by your definition), I would not.
   So I guess my short answer to your question is no.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      leroy64posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      In the course of reading your answer it occurs to me that tall is a relative term, which I think you touched on with the phrase "by your definition",

      replyreport
8. 69

   Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years ago

   If there was no risk of harm to the child, yes, I would. I am five feet tall and have no children, but imagining myself in that situation, I would have liked my child to be closer to average height - not tall, necessarily, just not very short.
   
   There are some disadvantages to being short, even if female. For instance, some people talk down to you in more ways than one - you find yourself waiting for them to pat you on the head and offer you a popsicle.  Try to join a conversation at a party and you get left out of it - you're not in their line of vision!  You have to be more assertive to get noticed. Then people think you have a Napoleon complex.
   
   You are constantly looking up at people's double chins and they are looking down at your dandruff, or dark roots, or even your bald patch, whereas for social purposes its much more helpful to be roughly at the same eye level.  Eye-to-eye contact is more conducive to communication than eye-to-chest contact.
   
   Then there's the problem of everything being designed for taller people - kitchens, sofas, clothing, cars.  How embarrassing it is to sit back on someone's sofa and find your feet don't reach the floor:)
   
   However, to be serious, health is probably the only real justification for messing with someone's DNA.  If you did it to improve appearance, where would it stop?  People with faces as ugly as frogs would be having their kids genetically engineered to look like movie stars, or even worse - reality T.V stars.  There would be streets swarming with clones of Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton, walking arm in arm with replicas of Brad Pitt and - heaven forbid - Justin Beiber.  We're probably better off staying as we are.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      leroy64posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I like the paragraph at the end of your answer, and that you voiced the reasons for actually doing this.  Your answer had some thought to it.  Armies of reality TV and Movies star look a likes?  I suspect those stars might not like that.

      replyreport
   2. 69

      Mazzy Boleroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for choosing my answer, leroy64!

      replyreport