The Ethics of Gene Editing from an Islamic Perspective: A Focus on the Recent Gene Editing of the Chinese Twins

Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (3):1851-1860 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In light of the development of “CRISPR” technology, new promising advances in therapeutic and preventive approaches have become a reality. However, with it came many ethical challenges. The most recent worldwide condemnation of the first use of CRISPR to genetically modify a human embryo is the latest example of ethically questionable use of this new and emerging field. Monotheistic religions are very conservative about such changes to the human genome and can be considered an interference with God’s creation. Moreover, these changes could cause perpetual changes to future generations. The Muslim scholars establish their decisions by addressing five foundations of Islamic law i.e. “maqāṣid al sharı̄`a”; the purposes of the law. These are dın̄, nafs, nasl, `aql and māl. To achieve this, the five principles should all be met before approval of an experiment like the Chinese embryo modifications; Qaṣd which is achieved in this case as it aims to protect the embryo from HIV. Yaqın̄ and Ḍarar were not satisfied as they require strong scientific certainty of the procedures, and evidence of safety. Ḍarūra by which the alternatives being compared; in this case more established and proven safe alternatives to protect the HIV transmission from the father are available, so this principle is not met. The final principle is `Urf, by which the social context of using any contemporary technology should be taken in consideration, and clearly this was not achieved. Collectively, germline changes are rejected from an Islamic perspective until the five principles are fulfilled. In the Chinese Twins gene editing case, there was clearly no justification or support for it according to the Muslim Jurisprudence laws. These laws and approaches can serve as an ethical checklist for such controversial research, especially in early stages of the research.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,846

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Human Genome Editing and Ethical Considerations.Kewal Krishan, Tanuj Kanchan & Bahadur Singh - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2):597-599.
Who Goes First? Deaf People and CRISPR Germline Editing.Carol Padden & Jacqueline Humphries - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (1):54-65.
Moving Beyond ‘Therapy’ and ‘Enhancement’ in the Ethics of Gene Editing.Bryan Cwik - 2019 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 28 (4):695-707.
The Ethics of Germline Gene Editing.Gyngell Christopher, Douglas Thomas & Savulescu Julian - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (4):498-513.
“Editing”: A Productive Metaphor for Regulating CRISPR.Ben Merriman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):62-64.
Daoism, Flourishing, and Gene Editing.Richard Kim - 2019 - In Erik Parens & Josephine Johnston (eds.), Human Flourishing in an Age of Gene Editing. Oxford University Press. pp. 72-85.
CRISPR Cautions: Biosecurity Implications of Gene Editing.Rachel M. West & Gigi Kwik Gronvall - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (1):73-92.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-03-04

Downloads
19 (#798,463)

6 months
6 (#518,648)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?