Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Sep;19(3):421-431.
doi: 10.1007/s11673-022-10186-8. Epub 2022 Apr 19.

Walking a Fine Germline: Synthesizing Public Opinion and Legal Precedent to Develop Policy Recommendations for Heritable Gene-Editing

Affiliations

Walking a Fine Germline: Synthesizing Public Opinion and Legal Precedent to Develop Policy Recommendations for Heritable Gene-Editing

Shawna Benston. J Bioeth Inq. 2022 Sep.

Abstract

Gene-editing technologies, such as CRISPR/Cas9, are internationally ethically fraught. In the United States, policy surrounding gene-editing has yet to be implemented, while the science continues to speed ahead. However, it is not enough that policy be implemented: in order for policy to establish limits for the technology such that benefits are possible while threats are kept at bay, such policy must be ethical. In turn, the ethics of gene-editing is a culturally determined field of inquiry. This piece presents a proposal for a study whose goal is to arrive at ethical policy recommendations for policymakers. To achieve this goal, this study proposes, what needs to be done is, first, to understand the full history and foundation of gene-editing by conducting a thorough legal, bioethical, and policy review for precedent assisted reproductive technologies and genetic reproductive technologies. Following this effort, an empirical study must be conducted involving careful surveys of key stakeholder groups on their knowledge and opinions of gene-editing. Such stakeholder groups must include bioethicists, medical geneticists, and lay persons, including those in the disability community.

Keywords: Assisted reproductive technologies; Bioethics; Disability; ELSI; Ethical legal and social implications of genetics; Gene-editing; Genethics; Genetic reproductive technologies.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Angeli, S., X. Lin, and X.Z. Liu. 2012. Genetics of hearing and deafness. The Anatomical Record: Advances in Integrative Anatomy and Evolutionary Biology 295(11): 1812-1829. - DOI
    1. Armitage, H. 2015. Gene-editing method halts production of brain-destroying proteins. Science, October 20. http://www.sciencemag.org.ezproxy.cul.columbia.edu/news/2015/10/gene-edi... . Accessed March 27, 2016.
    1. Asch, A. Prenatal diagnosis and selective abortion: A challenge to practice and policy. 1999. American Journal of Public Health 89(11): 1649-1657. - PubMed - PMC - DOI
    1. Baltimore, D., P. Berg, M. Botchan, et al. 2015. A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification. Science 348(6230): 36-38. - PubMed - PMC - DOI
    1. Barron, J. 1987. Views on surrogacy harden after baby M ruling. The New York Times, April 2. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/02/nyregion/views-on-surrogacy-harden-aft... . Accessed March 25, 2016.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources