ETHICS
SOCIAL ISSUES
on CRISPR
Once CRISPR is proven to be safe and effective, can it be used for enhancement purposes? Concerns arise that some would not distinguish whether some genes are "traits" or "diseases." For example, one would think that having a short stature means that he or she has achondroplasia dwarfism. This hinders what society deems as "normal," therefore promoting traits that discriminate those who have "undesirable" ones, making it extremely challenging to differentiate which traits are considered to be diseases and which ones are classified to be physical, mental, or physiological traits. This issue also leads to the idea of people wanting their children to not only be disease-free, but also have selected traits in order to be viewed as perfect in society: designer babies. Due to the rapid advancement of CRISPR technology, the idea of having designer babies is not impossible to achieve, which would create a perfect society where everyone is considered as flawless: intelligent, attractive, and athletic. A few worry that because of this, CRISPR could form a new class of individuals that are based on their genome's quality. In addition, it can also create a division between those who are privileged to afford the service, and those who are not, which separates enhanced individuals from unenhanced ones.
Dr. Jeff Steinberg
Director of Fertility Institute
I would predict that by next year, we will have determined sex with 100 percent certainty on a baby, and we will have determined eye color with about an 80 percent accuracy rate ... I think it's very important that we not bury our head in the sand and pretend these advances are not happening.
FOR
James Hughes
Transhumanist author & Sociologist
It's in the same category as abortion. If you think women have the right to control their own bodies, then they should be able to make this choice. There should be no law restricting the kind of kids people have, unless there's gross evidence that they're going to harm that kid, or harm society.
Dr. Arthur Caplan
Director of the Center for Bioethics
I disagree completely. There are really three things to think about. One is, when you move away from diseases, who's to say what's the better trait? Is it better to be red-headed than it is to be brown-haired? Is it better to have freckles or not? Those sorts of things are subjective and in some ways driven by our culture.
Dr. William Kearns
Director of Genesis Genetics in Detroit
I'm totally against this. My goal is to screen embryos to help couples have healthy babies free of genetic diseases. Traits are not diseases ... It's ridiculous and irresponsible. There are thousands of desperate couples who have no hope of having healthy children without this technology, and here we are talking about this.
Marcy Darnovsky
Director of the Centre for Genetics and Society
The concern is that we'll be creating a society with new sorts of discrimination. Now it's eyes and hair colour. What happens if it's height and intelligence? Some parents may have qualms about that, but still feel under pressure to go down that route.
AGAINST
ETHICAL ISSUES
on CRISPR
CRISPR technology still holds the possibilities of editing in the wrong place and mosaicism, a situation where some cells perform the edit while the others do not, from which both situations can cause a mutation due to the limited knowledge about the technology. Because of these, safety is of primary concern. Some researchers at the International Summit on Human Gene Editing say that because genome editing with CRISPR is not deemed to be completely safe, it should not be used for reproductive purposes that involve embryos in clinical trials. However, some argue that editing in embryos will result into the discovery of new technologies that are better than preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and in-vitro fertilization (IVF). This is an important issue due to the technology's direct impact towards human health. Scientists admit that the technology needs more room for improvement and accuracy. This is because if CRISPR/Cas9 misfires, unforeseen consequences can be made.
He Jiankui
Biophysics Researcher
Please remember that while there may be vocal critics, there are many silent families who have seen a child suffer from genetic disease and should not have to suffer that pain again ... They may not be the director of an ethics center quoted by the New York Times, but they are no less authorities on what is right and wrong — because it’s their life on the line.
V. Elving Anderson
late Christian geneticist
What inner resources will individuals have for coping with future discoveries? It’s sometimes claimed that questions of the future will be so unique that "old values" will be inadequate...but I have not found any basic questions that will not profit from consideration of a Biblical perspective.
AGAINST
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
the body responsible for promulgating and defending Catholic doctrine
The human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception; and therefore from that same moment his rights as a person must be recognized, among which in the first place is the inviolable right of every innocent human being to life
LEGAL ISSUES
on CRISPR
Do parents have the right to decide the faith of their children? Others argue that they already possess these rights in the form of influencing their children's environmental factors, which impacts the outcome of their lives. For example, parents who want their children to be interested in sports will expose them to athletic environments. This decision ultimately affects how a child matures, which is no different from the decision to select certain genes that interfere with how a child grows. In addition, due to numerous moral and religious issues, NIH does not fund any research that involves creating or destroying embryos. Even though 40 countries banned research on germline editing, some countries allow CRISPR editing on embryos that could not result in a live birth (nonviable embryos), while others can use the technology on viable ones.
