Is the ‘serious’ factor in germline modification really relevant? A response to Kleiderman, Ravitsky and Knoppers

Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (2):151-152 (2020)

Abstract

Should we use human germline genome modification only when serious diseases are involved? This belief is the underlying factor in the article written by Kleiderman, Ravitsky and Knoppers to which I now respond. In my opinion, the answer to this question should be negative. In this paper, I attempt to show that there are no good reasons to think that this technology should be limited to serious diseases once it is sufficiently proven to be safe and efficient. In fact, opting otherwise would negatively harm human beings’ right to the highest standard of health that unmodified embryos could promote. Therefore, the issue should not be so much to define adequately what a serious disease is, but rather to elucidate whether this concept should play any role beyond the context of preimplantation genetic testing. This paper argues that we should not accept the similarity between technologies such as PGT and HGGM because they face different challenges and offer totally different possibilities. Therefore, we are in urgent need to build a completely new ethical architecture that covers the application of germline editing in human embryos. As a part of that process, a much deeper debate on the necessity of distinguishing different disease types is required.

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,743

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-10-18

Downloads
10 (#907,205)

6 months
2 (#258,534)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

Genes and Equality.Colin Farrelly - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (6):587-592.

Add more references

Similar books and articles

Human germline editing: a historical perspective.Michel Morange - 2017 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 39 (4):34.
Human Genetic Technology, Eugenics, and Social Justice.W. Malcolm Byrnes - 2001 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 1 (4):555-581.
Shaping Individuality: Human Inheritable Germ Line Gene Modification.Maurizio Salvi - 2001 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (6):527-542.
Debating Ethical Issues in Genome Editing Technology.Renzong Qiu - 2016 - Asian Bioethics Review 8 (4):307-326.
"Playing God" and Germline Intervention.Ted Peters - 1995 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (4):365-386.