Communication 103 Persuasive Outline Stock Issues Apr 222987

Communication 103persuasive Outline Stock Issuesapril 8 2015general

Communication 103 Persuasive Outline, Stock Issues April 8, 2015 General Purpose: To persuade Specific Purpose: I. INTRODUCTION A. Imagine a world where you get to choose the type of child that you bring into it. You could pick their hair color, height, personality, intelligence, and many other aspects. You would get to design your baby. Would this be good or bad? B. If you have an opinion on this, then you will be interested in the concept of designer babies. C. I have read over ten articles on this topic and am well informed. D. I am here to convince you that the creation of designer babies will be negative to our society. E. If designer babies become a reality, they will affect everyone. While there can be some positives to certain aspects of this technology, they do no outweigh the negatives. The idea of perfection is a major barrier that our society needs to overcome in order to get past the want to genetically design children.

II. BODY A. In the near future, we may have the genetic technology needed to change an embryo and choose desirable characteristics for it. If this becomes a reality, it will affect everyone. 1. The concept of creating a child with specific traits is not far-fetched. IVF, which helps couples with infertility, pre-selects embryos before implantation. PGD screens embryos for genetic traits, allowing physicians to select those not predisposed to diseases like cystic fibrosis (Ly, 2010). 2. A major issue with designer babies is that it would be very expensive, limiting access to wealthy couples and potentially increasing inequality—a genetic elite (Steere, 2008). 3. Ethically, this raises concerns. When doctors helped infertile women or screened for diseases, they were praised. But choosing the sex of a child could lead to sex discrimination, especially in certain countries (Sandel, 2004). TRANSITION: The processes leading toward designer babies are already in place today.

B. Some positives are cited for designer babies, but they come with ethical and moral concerns. 1. A "savior child" is one example—created to help sick siblings by being the genetic match, raising questions about the child's quality of life (Wilkinson, 2003). 2. Some see benefits for the disability community, like choosing a deaf child to stay within their cultural identity, but ethical questions about bringing such characteristics intentionally are raised (Savulescu, 2002). 3. Society's obsession with physical and personal perfection fuels the desire for designer babies, but this fuels harmful perceptions that everyone should look or act a certain way, which is false and damaging (Shapiro, 2009; Darnovsky, 2001). TRANSITION: Without intervention, society risks increased discrimination based on appearance and abilities.

C. Failing to address this issue could lead to widespread discrimination and loss of acceptance. 1. Our society's fixation on perfection drives interest in designer babies; changing this mindset requires us to stop judging based on looks or performance (Brown, 2013). 2. Emphasizing individual differences should be prioritized over notions of "success" or "perfection," fostering acceptance. 3. Public action, such as signing petitions against designer baby technologies, can influence policy and societal norms, helping to curb this trend.

III. CONCLUSION A. I have argued that creating designer babies will have predominantly negative consequences. B. These impacts include societal inequality, ethical dilemmas, and increased discrimination. C. To prevent such outcomes, society must reject the obsession with perfection and embrace diversity and individuality. D. Reflect on the implications of a world where everyone is made to be the same—such a society is undesirable, and fostering acceptance is crucial.

References

• Brown, B. (2013). Want to be happy? stop trying to be perfect. CNN. Retrieved from
• Darnovsky, M. (2001). The case against designer babies. Center for Genetics and Society. Retrieved from
• Ly, S. (2010). Ethics of designer babies. The Embryo Project. Retrieved from
• Sandel, M. (2004). The case against perfection. The Atlantic Online.
• Savulescu, J. (2002). Deaf lesbians, “designer disability,” and the future of medicine. PMC.
• Shapiro, H. (2009). Girl’s self-esteem. In Examiner. Retrieved from
• Steere, M. (2008). Designer babies: Creating the perfect child. CNN. Retrieved from
• Wilkinson, S. (2003). Should selecting savior siblings be banned? Journal of Medical Ethics.
• Additional scholarly references would include research articles on genetics, bioethics, and societal impacts of genetic engineering to support the arguments made herein.