Genome Editing and Human Reproduction: The Therapeutic Fallacy and the "Most Unusual Case"

Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (1):126-140 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Among the objections to the implementation of what I will call "genome editing in human reproduction" is that it does not address any unmet medical need, and therefore fails to meet an important criterion for introducing an unproven procedure with potentially adverse consequences. To be clear: what I mean by GEHR is the use of any one of a number of related biological techniques, such as the CRISPR-Cas9 system, deliberately to modify a functional sequence of DNA in a cell of a human embryo, so that the modified sequence is replicated in the cells of a resulting child and may, without further intervention, be passed on to that child's biological descendants. It is...

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,063

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.
Trust in Science: CRISPR–Cas9 and the Ban on Human Germline Editing.Stephan Guttinger - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1077-1096.
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
2020-02-11

Downloads
29 (#764,401)

6 months
11 (#322,218)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references