For a long time, humanity produced children from the bodies of two people. It was impossible to know completely which genetic traits would be passed on to a child. Parents passed on what they had, and the combinations that emerged were left to chance.
After genome combination technology became widespread, this method changed rapidly. At first, it was a technology for eliminating genetic diseases. Its use was limited to avoiding fatal illnesses and correcting traits that made adaptation to radiation or changes in gravity difficult. Later, the process no longer ended with simply combining the two genomes of the parents. Necessary sections were rewritten, sections that would not be used were removed, and missing traits were obtained from external sources.
Genetic materials began to be traded. Skeletal traits from populations that had lived for generations on high-gravity planets, immune systems adapted to high-radiation environments, respiratory organs resistant to particular atmospheric components, and metabolic systems suited to prolonged sleep were stored and classified. At first, they were supplied for medical purposes. Later, they became materials that parents could choose.
It was no longer necessary to create a child using only the genomes of two people. The genomes of a man and a woman could be combined, or the genomes of two men could be rewritten to produce new reproductive cells. The genomes of two women could be combined in the same way. If one person wanted a child, that person could purchase the necessary sections to supplement their own genome. There were also cases in which three or more people became joint parents.
The proportion of genes contributed by each person varied from family to family. Some children inherited almost half their genes from each of two people, while others received most of theirs from one person and the remainder from several different sources. Some traits came from neither parent. This was not considered unusual.
Creating a child gradually ceased to mean inheriting a bloodline and became the construction of one human being from among many possibilities. The meaning of the word “parent” also changed. The person who lived with the child, the person legally responsible for the child, the person who provided genetic material, the person who purchased genetic material, and the person who chose the process of birth did not have to be the same person. One child could have several kinds of parents.
An old question gradually disappeared. Who does the child resemble? Other questions took its place. Which traits came from whom? Which parts were purchased? For what environment was the child designed? Which parts were deliberately left unchanged?
As genome combination became routine, not choosing began to be regarded as a choice in itself. A possibility of disease that parents knowingly failed to eliminate was treated not as chance but as a decision. The same applied to leaving traits that made environmental adaptation difficult unchanged. Parents had to explain not only what they had given their child, but also what they had chosen not to correct.
It was still possible to create children in the old way. The law did not prohibit it. Two people could choose nothing and have a child using only their own genomes. This remained a freedom enjoyed by citizens. At first, the method was called natural birth. For a time, it was called classical birth. Later, another name came into more common use.
Bad Sleep.
At first, it was a joke. It meant creating a child without genome testing, without eliminating the possibility of disease, and without checking environmental adaptability. The term contained no explicit condemnation. A child born through Bad Sleep was not an illegal child. Nor were the parents criminals. No administrative authority imposed fines on them, and no court prohibited the practice. There was no reason to prohibit it. Most people no longer did it anyway.
In galactic civilization, creating a child involved a lengthy process of preparation. Parents examined their own genomes, submitted environmental data for the planet where the child would live, and selected the necessary traits. Although it remained uncertain what abilities those choices would actually produce, people could say what they had given their children. Bad Sleep offered no such explanation. When a child was born through Bad Sleep, the parents could not explain why that child had the genome it did. That was because they had made no choices. The people of galactic civilization did not hate them. Most simply could not understand them. Why not reduce the possibility of disease when it could be reduced? Why not adapt a child to the environment in which it would live? Why insist on using only the traits of two people when desirable traits they lacked could be purchased? There was no legal compulsion behind those questions. But the questions continued.
Those who chose Bad Sleep gradually became people who had to explain their choice. They said they had chosen freely. They were then asked why they had passed that freedom on to their children as well. They said that chance, too, was part of being human. They were then asked whether suffering caused by chance should also be accepted as part of being human.
The debate did not last long. People moved away. Those who chose Bad Sleep sought out others like themselves. They looked for places where genome design was not compulsory and where a life in which nothing was selected required no explanation. Most of those worlds lay on the outskirts of the galaxy. It was not because medical technology was less advanced farther from the center of civilization. Genome combination facilities existed there as well. The freedom not to use them had simply survived longer. Galactic civilization did not consider these people to have been expelled. No expulsion order had ever been issued. There were no restrictions on residence. Citizens born through Bad Sleep were legally equal everywhere. Yet they became increasingly rare in the central regions of civilization. Bad Sleep was not a prohibited method, but one so marginalized that there was no need to prohibit it.