Reply to comment

I find that this brings up an interesting paradox that arises. We have a selfishness motivating us to preserve our own genes. Since immortality is impossible, we maintain our genes through reproduction and the maintenance of families, social groups, societies, countries and as an entire species. While we are not only motivated by preservation of genes, it is nevertheless a presence.

As we reach a point in society where having children as soon as possible is no longer necessary or even beneficial, we become divorced from many of the biological aspects of having children young. In classical Greece and Rome, the life expectancy was 28 years. Female fertility is sometimes claimed to decline after their 20s. In the US, the current age for marriage is 25 for women, and 27 for men. Not enough time to have children in classical Greece and Rome.

We are becoming a society which is no longer following biological norms. We are also a society that doesn't have to follow biological norms - medical science can fill in many of the gaps with varying success.

But if the risk of defects increase, should we start prohibiting having children later? I don't think so since medical science is progressing. As with anything, it is a personal assessment of risk. If we want to preserve our genes, it is a choice we must make.