";s:4:"text";s:5221:" Many Catholics, as you may know, will argue that this is a flawed process from its foundational moral assumptions because it has turned procreation into re-production–engaging in the kind of “thingification” that should be reserved for producing products sold in a marketplace and used as a mere means to something else’s end. The ethical implications of using gene editing on human beings is perhaps the greatest concern of this branch of technologies, but it is not the only concern. Second, isn’t it also highly unlikely that — given the radical moral diversity even in countries like Canada and the United States — we will arrive at the kind of consensus you suggest we would need? DeSales Media Group in the Diocese of Brooklyn
Should the answer to this question depend upon the cause of the short stature? Please remember, Crux is a for-profit organization, so contributions are not tax-deductible.
Many years ago, Lee Silver wrote a book called Remaking Eden in which he described a future world populated by Naturals (people with unmodified genomes) and the “GenRich” (people with modified/improved genomes). One central claim of your book is that we should not move forward without broad societal consensus from people with different interests and diverse perspectives.
This effort by Chinese scientist Jiankui He has been widely condemned as unethical and reckless. It is widely assumed that the average person will not be able to afford this technology. The agreed upon process described a commitment to the following principles: Responsibility: Participants are responsible for voicing their opinions, participating in the discussion, and actively implementing the agreement. The guide RNA takes the Cas9 enzyme to a place in the DNA where the Cas9—the molecular scissors—will make a double stranded cut so that a genetic modification can be made. Should the parents be able to modify their son’s genome in an effort to protect him from the harms of discrimination? [Editor’s Note: Françoise Baylis is University Research Professor at Dalhousie University.
Sign up to get the latest Catholic news and stories delivered right to your inbox. First, the chances of getting worldwide consensus on this and effectively regulating it worldwide — especially given what we’ve already seen in China and Russia–may be close to zero. Avoid competitive, right/wrong, win/lose thinking. My understanding of decision-making by consensus is inspired and informed by the work of women activists who in 1983 were camped out near the Seneca Army Depot to protest the deployment of Cruise and Pershing II nuclear missiles to Europe.
I, along with many others, believe that there is no robust moral demarcation line between therapy and enhancement. What different kinds of ethical issues does this raise? Respect: Respect others and trust them to make responsible input.
We’re a news site dedicated to offering the very best in smart, wired and independent coverage of the Vatican and the Catholic Church. In support of this goal, many of us have called for a moratorium to provide time for careful consideration of the ethical issues.
Non-viable embryos are defective embryos that are not capable of ongoing development. His parents are worried that he will experience significant discrimination. Baylis was one of the organizers of, and a key participant in, the 2015 International Summit on Human Gene Editing. Participate in finding an alternative solution.
Other controversies include eugenics, patentability and unrealistic expectations of professionals and the public. The creation and development of human beings, by contrast, should be guided by moral principles which sees human life as a gift, good for its own sake, quite apart from quality control over a product.
The point here, as concerns the hoped for efforts at developing broad societal consensus on human genome editing, is that working towards this goal will ensure a better outcome than would be the case without this effort if for no other reason that the process (involving respectful engagement) will mean that a wider range of interests and concerns will have been taken into consideration than would otherwise have been the case. An important worry with heritable human genome editing (where genetic changes are made to subsequent generations) is the ever-widening gap between the haves and the have nots. There is, for example, the increasing use of prenatal and pre-implantation genetic testing to select for or against the birth of children with desirable or undesirable traits.