In fact, yes.  However it is not commom/usual in the day-to-day conversation, you can see "generate" with the meaning of creating/making a baby.  

    So, it is more commom in sites with genetic/scientific talking, the likes of

  http://www.genetic-future.com/2008/07/which-baby-do-you-want-dilemma-for-21st.html       :

 "    The point is that even once we understand the genetics of complex traits perfectly, that won't be enough to generate a "perfect baby" through embryo screening alone.

     To illustrate this, imagine - ten or fifteen years from now - a couple who have just had IVF to generate perhaps two dozen embryos, and want to use genetic testing to decide which one(s) to implant. There won't be a single, stand-out embryo, perfect and disease-free, because generating a "perfect" embryo - one with the "desirable" variant at every single position in the genome - runs up against a pretty serious probabilistic challenge. Let's say there are only 5,000 DNA variants that negatively affected human health (an under-estimate) each with a frequency of just 1%: that means you would get a "perfect" embryo around once in every 1022 attempts (that's a 1 followed by 22 zeroes, a stupidly large number).

...
    It's likely that methods to generate large numbers of embryos will be developed, particularly once stem cell technology enables sperm and egg cells to be created from adult tissue, but generating and screening 1022 embryos is no mean feat: at the rate of one every second, this would take you about 200,000,000,000,000 years, ten thousand times longer than the current age of the universe.  "

    So stick to the usual, KIS (keep it simple) while in everyday conversations.   But you can find it used by the science experts.

     I hope it helps.

     PP.