One of the corner stones of Indian culture is the core belief that there is nothing, including the faith in God, superior to one's mother and in general motherhood. This core belief is cultivated by the society at a much younger age through stories from literature and we also see examples of that demonstrated in everyday life as in the recent fallout and patch up of the Ambani brothers through their mother. Scientific advancements are introducing a twist to that notion in the recent times. The definition of who is the mother was simple so long as a baby was born through the natural process.
A few years back doctors proved that 'test tube babies' are possible. That process by far was used to fertilize mom's egg outside of the body and then plant it in the uterus to facilitate natural birth. So far so good. Adoption has been there since ancient times. Social and legal systems of every country recognize and accommodate adoption. It continues to be there with an added option today. The surrogacy of motherhood for those who are fertile, but unable to physically bear a child. Wombs are rented for surrogacy. The fertilized egg of the mother is planted on the surrogate mother's womb to give birth to a child naturally for the biological parents. The birth mother is not actually the biological mother in this case! Still that remains as a ray of hope for small percentage of people who are otherwise left with no choice. However, in a recent case, a US court ruled more rights to the birth mother than the biological mother because the legal system does not consider egg/sperm donors as parents if the birth mother develops bonding with the baby before giving birth and chooses not to give it off to the biological parents. So the legal nuances need to be worked out in such situations.
The biggest sociopolitical challenge is yet to come, in my view. We learned the possibility of cloning an exact biological replica of an individual few years back. Quickly the scientific community realized producing a full replica of an individual is of little use since you cannot transfer the software, a.k.a. the contents of the brain to the clone. Instead researchers focused on growing body parts from the DNA of an individual instead of the whole person. In a few years, I suspect human race will grow and replace hearts, kidneys, lungs, pancreas, etc without having to live on medication for the entire life or undergo 'repair' surgery that is only a patch work. Imagine getting rid of coronary bypass, diabetic treatment, dialysis, etc with surgeries to replace heart, pancreas, kidney, etc that perfectly matches one's body, has little complication and makes one act younger and healthier after the treatment! We do that today for cars and bicycles. I was surprised after I moved to US to find that when a cycle tire is punctured, the tube is replaced rather than "fixed" as in India. Because the cost of replacement was cheaper than the cost of fixing a broken cycle tube. That possibility is, in my guess, only 20 years away to be a common practice for human body parts. Ultimate result is the longevity of human life. In the past 100 years, human life time extended from 50/60 yrs to 80/90 yrs. In the next 2 or 3 decades, it can increase beyond 100 years in the developed countries.
So what if the longevity increase? Lets look closely. With increasing option to live better and longer, both men and women are putting career aspirations ahead of their life choices including child birth. Children are viewed as a responsibility that slows down one's ambitions in life physically, economically and emotionally. Today in US, majority of women choose to stay young and single for at least 20 years before they choose to have a child in their late 30s and 40s. If you live for 100 years or more and there is option to bear a child even if one is 60 years old, the child bearing age is only going to be pushed out. Will the female body support bearing child in the 60s or alternate means will become more common? If a women does not have to undergo the physical challenge to gestate, gain weight and lose shape and still have a biological child if that is possible won't that become increasingly common? If the means to bear child completely eliminates involvement of the physical body of the mother, are they still the mother? Today in the developed nations, foster parents are considered more secure for children than the birth mothers in some cases. Will all parenting become foster parenting in the future? What social and cultural implication will that influence?
Well, I hope the dictum "annaiyum, pithavum munnari theivam" will hold true in India forever. Who knows what happens a century from now with the wave of scientific advancements...
A few years back doctors proved that 'test tube babies' are possible. That process by far was used to fertilize mom's egg outside of the body and then plant it in the uterus to facilitate natural birth. So far so good. Adoption has been there since ancient times. Social and legal systems of every country recognize and accommodate adoption. It continues to be there with an added option today. The surrogacy of motherhood for those who are fertile, but unable to physically bear a child. Wombs are rented for surrogacy. The fertilized egg of the mother is planted on the surrogate mother's womb to give birth to a child naturally for the biological parents. The birth mother is not actually the biological mother in this case! Still that remains as a ray of hope for small percentage of people who are otherwise left with no choice. However, in a recent case, a US court ruled more rights to the birth mother than the biological mother because the legal system does not consider egg/sperm donors as parents if the birth mother develops bonding with the baby before giving birth and chooses not to give it off to the biological parents. So the legal nuances need to be worked out in such situations.
The biggest sociopolitical challenge is yet to come, in my view. We learned the possibility of cloning an exact biological replica of an individual few years back. Quickly the scientific community realized producing a full replica of an individual is of little use since you cannot transfer the software, a.k.a. the contents of the brain to the clone. Instead researchers focused on growing body parts from the DNA of an individual instead of the whole person. In a few years, I suspect human race will grow and replace hearts, kidneys, lungs, pancreas, etc without having to live on medication for the entire life or undergo 'repair' surgery that is only a patch work. Imagine getting rid of coronary bypass, diabetic treatment, dialysis, etc with surgeries to replace heart, pancreas, kidney, etc that perfectly matches one's body, has little complication and makes one act younger and healthier after the treatment! We do that today for cars and bicycles. I was surprised after I moved to US to find that when a cycle tire is punctured, the tube is replaced rather than "fixed" as in India. Because the cost of replacement was cheaper than the cost of fixing a broken cycle tube. That possibility is, in my guess, only 20 years away to be a common practice for human body parts. Ultimate result is the longevity of human life. In the past 100 years, human life time extended from 50/60 yrs to 80/90 yrs. In the next 2 or 3 decades, it can increase beyond 100 years in the developed countries.
So what if the longevity increase? Lets look closely. With increasing option to live better and longer, both men and women are putting career aspirations ahead of their life choices including child birth. Children are viewed as a responsibility that slows down one's ambitions in life physically, economically and emotionally. Today in US, majority of women choose to stay young and single for at least 20 years before they choose to have a child in their late 30s and 40s. If you live for 100 years or more and there is option to bear a child even if one is 60 years old, the child bearing age is only going to be pushed out. Will the female body support bearing child in the 60s or alternate means will become more common? If a women does not have to undergo the physical challenge to gestate, gain weight and lose shape and still have a biological child if that is possible won't that become increasingly common? If the means to bear child completely eliminates involvement of the physical body of the mother, are they still the mother? Today in the developed nations, foster parents are considered more secure for children than the birth mothers in some cases. Will all parenting become foster parenting in the future? What social and cultural implication will that influence?
Well, I hope the dictum "annaiyum, pithavum munnari theivam" will hold true in India forever. Who knows what happens a century from now with the wave of scientific advancements...
Posts
