On a recent visit to the Interesting Times podcast, Noor Siddiqui, head of the IVF screening company Orchid, told Ross Douthat that baby-making needs to change. Not only will the genetic screening of embryos be available, she predicted; it will be the new normal of procreation.

The vast majority of parents in the future are not going to want to roll the dice with their child’s health. They’re going to see it as taking the maximum amount of care, the maximum amount of love. In the same way that they plan their nursery, plan their home, plan their preschool. … I think it then becomes about stewardship. It becomes about how do I make a responsible choice for my family.

Siddiqui is probably correct. When children are seen as accessories to adult life, eugenics makes the most sense. Why wouldn’t we take every step possible to optimize the health of the child we take home, even if that involves the creation and discarding of other tiny humans in the process? And why wouldn’t we use the best available technology to do so?

IVF is pitched as a therapeutic technology, enabling those unable to have kids to become parents. Increasingly, it is also sold by appealing to certain lifestyle choices. Those who wish to postpone pregnancy or hand off the task to willing incubators can still have the children they want.

To be clear, the IVF process has always separated procreation from sex, and it has always involved the screening and selection of embryos. Siddiqui is simply promising more of the same. “Sex is for pleasure,” she has said on several occasions; “IVF is for having children.” There is a market, she believes, in more thorough testing and better screening. She’s probably right.

Many people have noted that the 1997 movie Gattaca has proven to be eerily prophetic. The main difference is that society was obsessed with genetic perfection. Ours is intrigued by the concept but more as a way of maintaining the lifestyle we want.

Still, if Orchid’s services are ever perfected and normalized, parents who choose to have babies the old-fashioned way will be accused of being “reckless” and “irresponsible.” Those who don’t genetically screen out “imperfect” children will be labelled abusive and heartless. One can imagine a world in which insurance companies cover the costs of certain pregnancies but not others.

As Dr. Kristin Collier put it after a visit to Orchid’s website, “This is not ‘healthcare.’” Rather, it is a way of normalizing the next descent on an already very slippery slope. Recently, Lila Rose of LiveAction shared a video of a man chronicling his journey to parenthood with his male partner. “Quick recap,” he started. “We’re having two babies. We bought 40 frozen eggs from our egg donor.” The man then proceeded to yank Post-it notes off a cardboard, each representing one of those eggs with genetic “problems,” until he got down to the two keepers. Orchid will make it possible to do the same thing, only with tiny humans and with the swipe on a screen.

In The Wall Street Journal, Zusha Ellinson described “Silicon Valley’s Obsession With Having Smarter Babies.”

The fascination with what some call “genetic optimization” reflects deeper Silicon Valley beliefs about merit and success. “I think they have a perception that they are smart and they are accomplished, and they deserve to be where they are because they have ‘good genes,’” said Sasha Gusev, a statistical geneticist at Harvard Medical School. “Now they have a tool where they think that they can do the same thing in their kids as well, right?”

In a recent post on X, Princeton professor Robert P. George described perfectly what’s at stake as modern technology makes this more possible:

Eugenics is now a permanent temptation. Every new generation will face it. Resisting it will be as difficult as it is important. It is critical that we understand children as *persons*, not products. We must not make them objects of manufacture, subject to “quality controls.”

Indeed, but the ethical genie has been let out of the bottle for some time now. We must oppose eugenics in all forms, and we must train our children about God’s design and the God-given intrinsic good of children.

Stanley Hauerwas famously said, “In 100 years, if Christians are people identified as those who do not kill their children or their elderly, we will have been doing something right.” If so, that will likely mean that we are also known for the way we make babies.

Source