quite possibly a cat wrote:So there are two different lines of research that need to be done before we can start making designer babies.
The first line of research being able to pick what genes your kids get. The top tier tech here is editing genes of embryos. We've just started doing that. However, there are more primitive methods of doing so as well. The rich of course, have easier access to these methods, but costs do go down.
However, you also need to know what genes to give your kids! That will take a lot of research to work out. Importantly, only artificial barriers would allow the rich to get access to that information first. Unless a government somehow restricts the information's dissemination or use everyone will get access to the new genes as soon as the benefits get confirmed.
The solution then is a healthy democracy and civil society. If IP-law or similar is abused to somehow deny the masses the benefit of genes, the government can simply eliminate or change the problematic laws. On the other hand, if you lack a healthy democracy you could easily see a downward slide into some sort of dystopia. North Korea of a worst case scenario.
But that's not dependent on some sort of cool tech. Honestly, reproductive tech seems to have a very low rate of adoption. People just tend to have kids the old fashioned method if they can.
Some new thoughts:
As soon as a new therapy for a disease is found, it is no longer improper to look for a way to stop it on a genetic level. A lot cheaper for CSISPR to do a bit of snipping than to pay for a big therapy. And since it is "nothing new" there is no ethical reason not to do it. (For some).
As for people doing it the old fashioned way: My daughter and husband had genetic testing early in her pregnancies. That could track some diseases and many more are becoming possible targets for checking. That alone could make changes if parents want abortions to get rid of undesirable traits. And it would be a boon if a tiny change right at the start could get rid of the problem.
There are currently programs trying to get artificial wombs not only for women with problems in that but because poor nutrition there causes problems for poor people...it has been noted that poor kids start falling behind developmentally by six months old (and it might be younger but it is hard to test much before then) and this might be better.
I read today that there is something in our RNA (called THOR for now) that might fight cancer.
Right now it can cost ten thousand dollars for in vitro...more money if there is less insurance. Now what would happen if for that amount...or perhaps double or triple or even more...parents could build in some protections or benefits for their kids? College can cost parents nearly a hundred thousand dollars a year. Paying the equivalent for a bright, gorgeous girl who will probably live for a long time and never get cancer and a group of other diseases would be a bargain.