Has “biopolitics” changed what we think is “normal”

Many new technologies have enabled scientists to develop new medications and procedures to treat many different “diseases” and “disorders” that have long caused harm to the human population. I am very intrigued by such new developments especially those in the genetic field. I believe that genetics is, and will continue to be, at the forefront of medicine.

As far as my belief in ‘biopolitics’, I think it is a great step towards enhancing the human population. At the time being, such advances in medicine have, for the most part, helped humans. We do not know what the long term effects of such medications and procedures will be and it is something that we all need to think about.

I do believe that everyone has a right to their own body. I personally do not feel the need to express myself by drastically modifying my body but it is one’s own personal choice to do so. Although I do believe that people can do what they want to do to themselves, I do not think that others should be liable, especially when thinking about financing such modifications to oneself. One should not receive any type of benefit/disability policy if they decide to physically alter the “normal” to a degree that would legally deem the person disabled. If a doctor does not want to implant a chosen deaf embryo into a mother, that is his or her right just as much as it is one’s right to choose that they want only a deaf embryo implanted.

I am a firm believer in medical discovery and treatment. I think it is a great way to enhance the human population. It seems as though Nikolas Rose, in An Emergent form of Life?, questions ‘biopolitics’ and its motivations. He writes: “humans have never been “natural”, and at least since the invention of language we have been augmenting our capacities through intellectual, material, and human technologies…when are conditions deserving of medical treatment and when are they not?” It is valid to question the motivations that have recently surfaced of certain procedures, especially those in the cosmetic surgery department. At the same time, I think that we need to be thankful for such advances but use them with caution and in moderation.

Here is an article on parents choosing only deaf embryos like I had talked about in class. I think that this is a very interesting debate on “designer babies” and the possibility of abuse of our genetic advances. It definitely shows that there are always many different ideas of what is considered “normal” and “ethical”.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article3087367.ece

Also, here is an interesting blog about ethics in genetic use: http://parrcenterforethics.blogspot.com/2009/03/physicians-at-university-college-in.html