As a psychiatrist, I'm the person tasked with "give them our best efforts to heal them". So far these efforts are medications which marginally work, at the cost of mild side effects for most people and extreme side effects for a few. I don't see anything noble about ensuring that some fraction of people are doomed to be suicidally unhappy unless we give them meds that ruin their sex drive and make them slightly tired all the time, in which case they might make it to the tenth or twentieth percentile of happiness or something, and I don't understand why we should perpetuate this system of immiserate-then-medicate rather than having them be healthy to begin with. Herasight's technology isn't interesting enough yet to cause crazy sci-fi moral problems like 'what if nobody could ever be unhappy' - the screening is weak, you can only select out of as much variation as exists in some small number of embryos, and you can only genetically select for one thing at once (so most parents will spend most of their optimization power on other things, so at best this will cut off a tiny bit of the extreme long tail of depression). But you're right that it's a slippery slope, and I do think that once we get more interesting technology, we should at least consider breaking the Torment Nexus, and that this will do less damage to the "human experience" than people think. See . I've also written a little bit about 'helping people vs. excluding them from existence' at

Oh, you're worried about a Jewish guy's apocalyptic cult? You're scandalized that they consort with prostitutes? You think their message of compassion for everyone threatens normal bonds of family, community, and nation? Should we throw you a party? Should we invite Pontius Pilate?