> For instance, extroversion is strongly related to fertility in modern societies, but this was perhaps not always the case.
No need for "perhaps"; if extraversion had always been strongly related to fertility, it would have been fixed (if the effect was positive) or eliminated (if negative).
I'm skeptical that IVF will ever be used at scale by women who don't have to use it. Becoming a Bene Tleilax Axlotl Tank is not appealing to most given that IVF involves a series of painful procedures for women and these days reproduction becomes more of a lifestyle choice rather than something crucial for a woman so there is little appetite for unnecessary pain.
Caesarean births are popular because they decrease pain compared to normal birth while IVF is more painful, expensive, invasive and much less fun than the old fashioned fertilization method.
IVF increased in frequency because fertility treatments become more widespread for a variety of reasons, including older moms but I'm not sure that there is a proportional increase in the use of sperm donors as male fertility is far less affected by aging so all IVF babies I know of personally were made using the husband's sperm, not a donor's.
Given the current mores across the West for parents to improve their child's intelligence with gene editing will probably be a social and political faux pas if not outright forbidden by law. Even China is hostile to gene editing as proven by the He Jiankui scandal.
In the future, all parents will use embryo selection and IVF. They will get a menu of items to select from. Eye color, +$1000 etc.
Then they can see and hear exactly how the child will look like in a hologram. Both as a new born and as an adult.
They will see all the risks and can deselect for all the genetic traits like schizophrenia and autism, for an added cost but the reduced insurance price will make it worth it. (We like to talk about the potential eugenic effects, but the reduction of dysgenics will be far more valuable for society)
The mother will not carry the child through the pregnancy, it will be safe in an artificial womb and the parents can see the child on live video.
> For instance, extroversion is strongly related to fertility in modern societies, but this was perhaps not always the case.
No need for "perhaps"; if extraversion had always been strongly related to fertility, it would have been fixed (if the effect was positive) or eliminated (if negative).
More evidence of reverse Flynn Effect now: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0160289623000156
I'm skeptical that IVF will ever be used at scale by women who don't have to use it. Becoming a Bene Tleilax Axlotl Tank is not appealing to most given that IVF involves a series of painful procedures for women and these days reproduction becomes more of a lifestyle choice rather than something crucial for a woman so there is little appetite for unnecessary pain.
Caesarean births are popular because they decrease pain compared to normal birth while IVF is more painful, expensive, invasive and much less fun than the old fashioned fertilization method.
IVF increased in frequency because fertility treatments become more widespread for a variety of reasons, including older moms but I'm not sure that there is a proportional increase in the use of sperm donors as male fertility is far less affected by aging so all IVF babies I know of personally were made using the husband's sperm, not a donor's.
Given the current mores across the West for parents to improve their child's intelligence with gene editing will probably be a social and political faux pas if not outright forbidden by law. Even China is hostile to gene editing as proven by the He Jiankui scandal.
In the future, all parents will use embryo selection and IVF. They will get a menu of items to select from. Eye color, +$1000 etc.
Then they can see and hear exactly how the child will look like in a hologram. Both as a new born and as an adult.
They will see all the risks and can deselect for all the genetic traits like schizophrenia and autism, for an added cost but the reduced insurance price will make it worth it. (We like to talk about the potential eugenic effects, but the reduction of dysgenics will be far more valuable for society)
The mother will not carry the child through the pregnancy, it will be safe in an artificial womb and the parents can see the child on live video.