When is it Safe to Edit the Human Germline?

Science and Engineering Ethics 27 (4):1-21 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the fall of 2018 Jiankui He shocked the international community with the following announcement: two female babies, “Lulu” and “Nana,” whose germlines had been modified by the cutting edge, yet profoundly unsafe CRISPR-Cas9 technology had been born. This event galvanized policy makers and scientists to advocate for more explicit and firm regulation of human germline gene editing. Recent policy proposals attempt to integrate safety considerations and public input to identify specific types of diseases that may be safe targets for human GGE. This paper argues these policy proposals are inadequate in different ways. While Sarkar intends to incorporate input from the disability community for the purpose of deciding the value of human GGE, I argue that his strategy for doing so is inadequate. I’ll argue that an iterative, deliberative process is a more appropriate framework for allowing the disability community to inform policy on human GGE. Further policy proposals have been framed in terms of monogenetic or single-gene diseases. I argue that this way of conceptualizing disease is not what matters for deciding which disorders are viable candidates for human GGE. Instead, what matters is that the disease in question must have genes that have a high degree of causal control with respect to the disease and alternative nucleic acid sequences variants that are likely to produce traits deemed desirable must be identified. Previous policy proposals leave unspecified. What conditions must be met for satisfying condition should not be left to individual scientists to decide for themselves. The present proposal offers some guidance on this issue.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,795

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

The Ethics of Germline Gene Editing.Gyngell Christopher, Douglas Thomas & Savulescu Julian - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (4):498-513.
Human Germline Genome Editing in the Clinical Context.Giovanni Rubeis - 2018 - In Matthias Braun, Hannah Schickl & Peter Dabrock (eds.), Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty: Ethical, Legal and Societal Challenges of Human Genome Editing. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. pp. 149-160.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-07-06

Downloads
44 (#510,722)

6 months
7 (#736,605)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Janella Baxter
Sam Houston State University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Genetics and philosophy : an introduction.Paul Griffiths & Karola Stotz - 2013 - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Genetics and Reductionism.Sahotra Sarkar - 2012 - Cambridge University Press.
Altered Inheritance: Crispr and the Ethics of Human Genome Editing.Françoise Baylis - 2019 - Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
The Eugenic Mind Project.Robert A. Wilson - 2018 - Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

View all 14 references / Add more references