Rhetorical Precis of "The Parental Investment Factor and the Child's Right to an Open Future"

In "The Parental Investment Factor and the Child's Right to an Open Future" (2009) Dena Davis asserts that the cost of gene mapping as well as the potential of forcing an unborn child into hobbies they may not like is unethical. Davis supports this claim by using children that were born naturally and how they sometimes do not agree with what their parents want for their future. The writer soons suggests that gene mapping gives a child a life that may seem unfilling. Davis uses the example of giving a child the physical attributes to be a football player, however, the attributes of the mind cannot be picked so the child might want to play the piano instead of be a quarterback. Davis has a very strong opinion on this topic showing the risk for such gene mapping does not out weigh the end result. Her tone is very stern especially for picking and choosing the "acceptable" genes a parent wants for their child. She outlines the costs of such procedures as well as the risks involved for both the mother and the child. By outling this she hints to the readers that reproduction should not be risky nor expensive but rather suprising and wonderful.

"The Parental Investment Factor and the Child's Right to an Open Future"