"Matters of Life and Death"

The Guardian Observer has it right in the title of this op-ed by Mary Riddell. But, then it falls all apart. Sort of like the ethics that is now "bioethics:" justification for whatever action is desired at the moment.

Ms. Riddell says that we shouldn't worry about the babies of the future, but rather for the babies we are and are not having today. I can't imagine that any adult cannot see that the babies of today will be the parents of tomorrow and that the ways we manipulate today's babies will most definitely affect tomorrow's.Neither set is "imaginary." And neither are the concerns which she parodies and warps in order to belittle them.

Yes, we should be concerned that the UK regulatory agency, The Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, is loosening the criteria for Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis. It doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate from the ecological disasters due to decreased plant and animal diversity to the possible future problems of a species as complex as humans if we begin deleting entire populations based on diseases and syndromes. Just because we have new technology to measure for genetic defect does not mean that we have observed, much less measured, the actual mechanisms of any of those diseases.

However, the biggest problem of imagination and extrapolation of data that Ms. Riddell has is the ability to connect the embryos she so easily names as less than human and fodder for medical experimentation and use as spares for the people that she personally feels deserve to benefit from the death of others.

She ridicules the idea that UK citizens will practice gender selecton, or family balancing as she calls it. While noting that several Asian nations have abused the practice. And she propagates the notion that "therapeutic" cloning is distinct from "reproductive" cloning in any way other than that of the intentions of the cloners.

There's no therapy in destroying the younger, embryonic brothers and sisters of the very people she finds so worthy.

another thought/edit:

I've said it before: the very definition of "equal rights" is that they are ,uh, "equal."

There's absolutely no doubt that the embryos resulting from in vitro fertilization and cloning are human. Ms. Riddell mentions the first baby born of IVF. We just had yet another reminder in "Snuppy," the dog that veterinarian, Dr. Hwang, cloned in South Korea.

Orwell would be proud: even in our day - or more in our day than in his - Some of us are more equal than others. But, in Animal Farm, the line is actually, "Some animals are more equal than others."