Babies Serving Time


Ethics, morality, most people find themselves trying to do the right thing; people might ask themselves "What would Jesus do?" Whatever your style is in trying to do the right thing you may frequently find yourself in a moral gray area. Hypothetical Situations like: If you could go back in time and kill Hitler when he was a baby, would you do it, and would that be ethical? Maybe that example is too hypothetical for you.
What about if there was a gene found for "criminality"? This is a great example of a moral gray area. The ethical issues stem from the fact that this gene would be identifiable in anyone, newborns and adults alike. In the case of an adult, they could potentially be jailed before committing a crime because of the presence of this gene. The motto of innocent until proven guilty would no longer apply. This could even cause a reemergence of the eugenics movement, and those with this gene would be sterilized. In the case of an infant, we might see them being arrested at birth if they were unlucky enough to inherit that gene. The ethical issues with this situation are endless. As a whole, based on history I believe that society WOULD respond as I explained. We SHOULD respond in a more optimistic manner. As a society we should give extra attention to those individuals who are found to have this "criminality" gene, in hopes of overriding nature with nurture and avoiding the thought of a babies going to jail.

If this situation still seems too crazy then click here to read an article about a study that seems to have found a link to violence in delinquents. We may be closer to baby prison than you think...


That was an interesting article to read to support your post. I like your focus on the gray area of the matter. Sometimes people think that they are not in that grey area when really they are just trying to fool themselves. I agree with you in your hypothetical situation. Do I like the thought of babies going to a prison because they were born with a certain gene? No. Would it be fair to take away people's rights because of a gene? No. The idea that it could create a brighter future would be the main focus in that argument. Good post.

I enjoyed this post. I think that you covered both sides of the issue very well. I personally don't think that just because a person has a gene that has been found to be correlated with a certain behavior means that they will automatically have that behavior. Like in the movie Gattacca, the genetic make up of a person is only part of who they are, and other parts of their person also need to be taken into account.

It would be a very sad day if we reached the point in society where people were jailed simply on the premise that they were prone to do bad things. This being said, I can't say that I would put it out of the realm of possibility, given what the human race has shown itself to be capable of. Let's just hope that if future generation do, in fact, encounter this moral dilemma, they'll give people a chance to prove themselves as more a product of nurture than nature.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by mehdi006 published on May 6, 2012 11:46 PM.

Memory Loss portrayed through film was the previous entry in this blog.

Another reason to consider yourself lucky is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.