You can say the same thing with saving the life of people with rare sicknesses or disabilities in the west. Of course it would be cheaper to let them die as babies. But that’s not a society we wanna live in.

Well the thing with that is that it’s a limited operation. You save the person, and then, if they have kids, their kids won’t be any more likely to be similarly afflicted than anyone else’s kids.

A more apt comparison would be helping someone with a disabling genetic condition to have kids who will then have the same disabling genetic condition.

If you can fix the genetic condition at the same time then sure this is a noble aim. But otherwise, are you not just kicking the can down the road?

Saving the person themselves would be fine, to be clear, I’m just commenting specifically on the “and helping them to have children with the same condition” bit. And where “development” would be curing the condition by allowing them to be self sustaining without continual outside intervention.