ANALYSIS OF SOURCES
[9] Ronald M. Green, 2008. Babies by Design: The Ethics of Genetic Choice. 1 Edition. Yale University Press.
This text was written by Ronald Michael Green, he is a very experienced author and has written many more books similar to this one, some examples are The Human Ebryo Research Debates and a New Method for Business ethics, all of which have been published by Yale University Press. The author did cite his sources and it was released in 2008, though the book was primarily focused on the ethics facet of the issue, so the time it was published isn’t as important. The author’s primary purpose is to inform the reader and give them a deeper understanding of the moral issues that relate to designer babies. The author stated points for both sides of the issue and the arguments he presented seemed very unbiased. I think this book has a very wide audience for a text of its nature because although it is most likely primarily intended for people such as myself who are researching the issue, I believe that anyone with an interest in the topic would enjoy it as from what I read it was surprisingly enjoyable. Overall this text was very useful and was my most important resource for my biotechnology assignment.
[7] Debate Topic: Is it ethical to genetically design babies before they are born? | Debate.org. 2014. Debate Topic: Is it ethical to genetically design babies before they are born? | Debate.org. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-it-ethical-to-genetically-design-babies-before-they-are-born/1/. [Accessed 08 May 2014].
This source was one of my more unorthodox resources, put concisely it was an internet debate, the topic being ‘Is it ethical to genetically design babies before they are born?’ Due to it being a debate sources were not cited but many of the points raised coincided with information from other resources so I do not doubt its credibility. The purpose of the authors was to debate the pros and cons of designer babies while also informing the reader. Many valid arguments were raised from both sides of the debate. This source was aimed primarily at people researching information on the issue although it was a very well-fought debate and I believe that it would spark the interest of many people who debate. This resource was very practical and was one of my most used as it contained lots of information on my topic.
[1] Better Health Channel. 2014. In vitro fertilisation (IVF) - Better Health Channel. [online] Available at: http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/In_vitro_fertilisation [Accessed: 29 Mar 2014].
This text had no authors but was issued by a well-known and well respected Australian Government group known as the Better Health Channel. Sources were not cited but it is said that the page has been produced in consultation with Monash University and approved by them. The purpose of the page was only to inform and as such only one view was presented. The source is government funded. The audience of this article differs to my other ones as it is not actually aimed at people researching designer babies, it is actually aimed for people who are considering conceiving their children via IVF. Nonetheless, it was a short source but it did provide me with the vital information that I needed, therefore serving its purpose.
[8] Institute of Ideas, 2003. Designer Babies: Where Should We Draw the Line (Debating Matters). Edition. Hodder & Stoughton
Hodder and Stoughton’s book was the second one I used to find information, though this was nowhere near as useful as the first. Sources were cited and they seemed very credible but the book was published in 2003 and as such lots of the information was very dated and much of it was unusable. The purpose of the text was also to inform but it was much more difficult to navigate then the other book which made valuable information much harder to find. The book does express arguments for both sides and is unbiased. I think this book is written for people who endeavour to research this topic to a much higher level than was required of me. To summarise, although it was a credible source, lots of the information was out of date and no longer valid. As well as this the book was very difficult to navigate and usable information was hard to find, this was not a good source.
[11] Designer Babies - Arguments against Designer Babies. 2014. Designer Babies - Arguments against Designer Babies. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.rsrevision.com/GCSE/christian_perspectives/genetics/designer_babies/against.htm. [Accessed 08 May 2014].
The final source I’m going to analyse is this one. The author is not mentioned but after having a look through the rest of the site it seems to be a very credible non-governmental organisation. Sources were also not mention but the focus of the article was ethics not science so much of the page was personal opinion. The purpose of the page was to inform readers of the negatives regarding designer babies. The source only argued for one side of the issue and it was a Christian website so it could be described as biased, but the points raised were completely valid and were easily backed up by science. It did not say when the page had been issued but because it was discussing morals this was not too important. This resource was, in my opinion, aimed at people who wished to learn about the issue and wanted to be given arguments from a different perspective. The site was very helpful and quite easily one of my most practical resources.
This text was written by Ronald Michael Green, he is a very experienced author and has written many more books similar to this one, some examples are The Human Ebryo Research Debates and a New Method for Business ethics, all of which have been published by Yale University Press. The author did cite his sources and it was released in 2008, though the book was primarily focused on the ethics facet of the issue, so the time it was published isn’t as important. The author’s primary purpose is to inform the reader and give them a deeper understanding of the moral issues that relate to designer babies. The author stated points for both sides of the issue and the arguments he presented seemed very unbiased. I think this book has a very wide audience for a text of its nature because although it is most likely primarily intended for people such as myself who are researching the issue, I believe that anyone with an interest in the topic would enjoy it as from what I read it was surprisingly enjoyable. Overall this text was very useful and was my most important resource for my biotechnology assignment.
[7] Debate Topic: Is it ethical to genetically design babies before they are born? | Debate.org. 2014. Debate Topic: Is it ethical to genetically design babies before they are born? | Debate.org. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-it-ethical-to-genetically-design-babies-before-they-are-born/1/. [Accessed 08 May 2014].
This source was one of my more unorthodox resources, put concisely it was an internet debate, the topic being ‘Is it ethical to genetically design babies before they are born?’ Due to it being a debate sources were not cited but many of the points raised coincided with information from other resources so I do not doubt its credibility. The purpose of the authors was to debate the pros and cons of designer babies while also informing the reader. Many valid arguments were raised from both sides of the debate. This source was aimed primarily at people researching information on the issue although it was a very well-fought debate and I believe that it would spark the interest of many people who debate. This resource was very practical and was one of my most used as it contained lots of information on my topic.
[1] Better Health Channel. 2014. In vitro fertilisation (IVF) - Better Health Channel. [online] Available at: http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/In_vitro_fertilisation [Accessed: 29 Mar 2014].
This text had no authors but was issued by a well-known and well respected Australian Government group known as the Better Health Channel. Sources were not cited but it is said that the page has been produced in consultation with Monash University and approved by them. The purpose of the page was only to inform and as such only one view was presented. The source is government funded. The audience of this article differs to my other ones as it is not actually aimed at people researching designer babies, it is actually aimed for people who are considering conceiving their children via IVF. Nonetheless, it was a short source but it did provide me with the vital information that I needed, therefore serving its purpose.
[8] Institute of Ideas, 2003. Designer Babies: Where Should We Draw the Line (Debating Matters). Edition. Hodder & Stoughton
Hodder and Stoughton’s book was the second one I used to find information, though this was nowhere near as useful as the first. Sources were cited and they seemed very credible but the book was published in 2003 and as such lots of the information was very dated and much of it was unusable. The purpose of the text was also to inform but it was much more difficult to navigate then the other book which made valuable information much harder to find. The book does express arguments for both sides and is unbiased. I think this book is written for people who endeavour to research this topic to a much higher level than was required of me. To summarise, although it was a credible source, lots of the information was out of date and no longer valid. As well as this the book was very difficult to navigate and usable information was hard to find, this was not a good source.
[11] Designer Babies - Arguments against Designer Babies. 2014. Designer Babies - Arguments against Designer Babies. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.rsrevision.com/GCSE/christian_perspectives/genetics/designer_babies/against.htm. [Accessed 08 May 2014].
The final source I’m going to analyse is this one. The author is not mentioned but after having a look through the rest of the site it seems to be a very credible non-governmental organisation. Sources were also not mention but the focus of the article was ethics not science so much of the page was personal opinion. The purpose of the page was to inform readers of the negatives regarding designer babies. The source only argued for one side of the issue and it was a Christian website so it could be described as biased, but the points raised were completely valid and were easily backed up by science. It did not say when the page had been issued but because it was discussing morals this was not too important. This resource was, in my opinion, aimed at people who wished to learn about the issue and wanted to be given arguments from a different perspective. The site was very helpful and quite easily one of my most practical resources.