What ethical concerns arise from designer babies?

Definition and Context

Designer babies are typically understood as children whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected or altered, often with the goal of preventing disease or possibly enhancing certain traits. Technological advances in genetic engineering, such as CRISPR, have accelerated discussions on this topic, raising deeply significant questions about human responsibility, morality, and the nature of life itself.

The Value of Life and Human Dignity

Scripture repeatedly emphasizes the sacred value of every human being. “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). This foundational truth affirms that human life is neither an accident nor merely the result of genetic processes. Each person carries an inherent dignity because of the very image impressed upon humanity.

Genetic modifications designed to eliminate painful or fatal diseases naturally appeal to compassion and the desire to alleviate suffering. Yet, it is vital to respect the dignity of each life in its uniqueness and complexity. If genetic manipulation becomes a tool for selecting superficial traits or for fulfilling arbitrary parental desires, there is a risk of undermining the principle that every human being is intrinsically loved and valued.

Sovereignty and Purpose

Scripture portrays the Creator as intimately involved in the formation of human life: “For You formed my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Marvelous are Your works, and I know this very well” (Psalm 139:13–14). The involvement and sovereignty of the One who forms each person call into question any process by which human beings might assume ultimate authority over a life’s features.

When humanity seeks control that only properly belongs to the One who made the universe, there is a perilous possibility of overstepping rightful boundaries. “Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why have you made me like this?’ Has the potter no right over the clay?” (Romans 9:20–21). The ethical concern arises when genetic modification proceeds with an attitude that suggests humans can perfect life on their own terms rather than acting as responsible stewards of the gift of life.

The Sanctity of Family and Moral Responsibility

Decisions about altering the genetic traits of children affect not only the child but also the family and wider society. Scripture upholds the family as a foundational social and spiritual unit (Ephesians 6:1–4). Within this unit, parents bear the responsibility of nurturers, called to raise their children toward lives that reflect compassion, wisdom, and integrity.

When genetic engineering is used to create so-called “perfect children,” it may shift focus away from cultivating virtue and character in the context of parental love and guidance. Instead, an overemphasis on genetic advantages can promote a performance-driven standard, diminishing the authenticity of relationships within the family. These concerns echo broader human history, where attempts to engineer a superior group of people have led to eugenic abuses, transcending legal or scientific oversight to become ethically disastrous.

Inequality and Societal Implications

Designing a child’s genetic traits can quickly become a service available primarily to those with substantial resources, potentially creating a deeper class divide. Wisdom literature warns of partiality that leads to social injustice: “To show partiality is not good...” (Proverbs 28:21). If designer technologies develop along consumer lines, the inequality between those who can pay for enhancement and those who cannot would pose serious ethical challenges, reinforcing patterns of privilege and marginalization.

Moreover, the pursuit of genetic “improvements” can encourage a culture that undervalues those with disabilities or perceived limitations. However, biblical teaching emphasizes the value of each individual in the body of humanity, urging that no one is superfluous or unimportant (see 1 Corinthians 12:22–26). A society that allows or encourages discard of embryos or selection of children solely on genetic desirability risks a dangerous devaluation of life.

Humility and Dependence on Higher Wisdom

Genetic technologies continue to expand rapidly, but human wisdom remains finite. “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways,” declares the LORD (Isaiah 55:8). Every tool or achievement of science should be tempered by an acknowledgment of inherent limits. Where humility is absent, people may fall prey to the belief that they can safeguard all future outcomes, risking unintended consequences.

Preventing or curing disease aligns with the overarching scriptural principle of caring for the health and well-being of others (see Luke 10:33–34). Yet, it remains crucial to maintain a posture of reverence and awe when venturing into genetic frontiers, recognizing that altering the human germline can have ramifications for many generations to come.

Potential Slippery Slopes

When standards for acceptable or “desirable” genes become flexible or subject to public opinion and cultural norms, the criteria could shift alarmingly. History shows that once society normalizes a practice—especially one involving human life—controls or regulations might erode. In the realm of embryo selection and genetic modification, there is the troubling possibility of normalizing design choices that go far beyond treating disease, drifting into cosmetic or enhancement modifications that diminish meaningful diversity.

Furthermore, the acceptance of selecting for certain traits can pave the way to selecting against others, raising deep moral questions about whose traits are deemed worthy of preservation. This shift is closely linked to eugenic attitudes, which have historically proven destructive.

Stewardship and Ethical Use of Technology

It is possible to affirm the responsible use of medical advancements while also recognizing that humankind is called to wise stewardship. In the earliest account of humanity’s role on earth, there is a commissioning to tend and keep creation (Genesis 2:15). Stewardship implies an ethical framework, balancing compassion for those afflicted by genetic diseases with respect for the boundaries of responsibility and reverence for the Author of life.

The goal of healing or mitigating suffering aligns with our duty toward neighborly love. Yet, aiming beyond healing and into “perfection” can divert focus from the wisdom and counsel present throughout biblical teaching. This teaching calls for trust that extends beyond human ingenuity, anchored in the recognition that ultimate restoration cannot come from human hands alone.

Conclusion of Teaching Points

1. Human beings bear the image of the One who created them, conferring intrinsic dignity on every person.

2. Overextending genetic control risks surpassing humankind’s rightful stewardship and infringing on the domain of the Creator.

3. The family and broader society are impacted by genetic customization, potentially fostering inequality and undermining acceptance of diverse expressions of life.

4. A posture of humility and devotion to overarching wisdom is paramount, recognizing finite human knowledge.

5. Medical advancements that heal disease or free individuals from suffering can be affirmable, provided the ultimate goal remains compassion and reverence for life.

In considering the ethical concerns surrounding designer babies, the fundamental principle is that human life is neither a commodity nor a project of personal ambition. The scriptural witness upholds the preciousness of each life and the reverence due to the Creator. The choice to employ technology must remain grounded in respect for timeless truths that guide moral responsibility, protecting and honoring the sanctity of every individual formed in the womb.