» Articles » PMID: 30357560

Will CRISPR Germline Engineering Close the Door to an Open Future?

Overview
Journal Sci Eng Ethics
Date 2018 Oct 26
PMID 30357560
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The bioethical principle of autonomy is problematic regarding the future of the embryo who lacks the ability to self-advocate but will develop this defining human capacity in time. Recent experiments explore the use of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/Cas9 for germline engineering in the embryo, which alters future generations. The embryo's inability to express an autonomous decision is an obvious bioethical challenge of germline engineering. The philosopher Joel Feinberg acknowledged that autonomy is developing in children. He advocated that to reserve this future autonomy, parents should be guided to make ethical decisions that provide children with open futures. Here, Feinberg's 1980 open future theory is extended to the human embryo in the context of CRISPR germline engineering. Although the embryo does not possess the autonomous decision-making capacity at the time of germline engineering, the parental decision to permanently change the unique genetic fabric of the embryo and subsequent generations disregards future autonomy. Therefore, germline engineering in many instances is objectionable considering Feinberg's open future theory.

Citing Articles

Comparative ethical evaluation of epigenome editing and genome editing in medicine: first steps and future directions.

Alex K, Winkler E J Med Ethics. 2023; 50(6):398-406.

PMID: 37527926 PMC: 11137457. DOI: 10.1136/jme-2022-108888.


Toward Anticipatory Governance of Human Genome Editing: A Critical Review of Scholarly Governance Discourse.

Nelson J, Selin C, Scott C J Responsible Innov. 2022; 8(3):382-420.

PMID: 35281674 PMC: 8916747. DOI: 10.1080/23299460.2021.1957579.


Rethinking the "open future" argument against predictive genetic testing of children.

Garrett J, Lantos J, Biesecker L, Childerhose J, Chung W, Holm I Genet Med. 2019; 21(10):2190-2198.

PMID: 30894702 PMC: 6754817. DOI: 10.1038/s41436-019-0483-4.


Islamic Perspectives on CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Human Germline Gene Editing: A Preliminary Discussion.

Isa N, Zulkifli N, Man S Sci Eng Ethics. 2019; 26(1):309-323.

PMID: 30830592 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-019-00098-z.

References
1.
Gyngell C, Douglas T, Savulescu J . The Ethics of Germline Gene Editing. J Appl Philos. 2017; 34(4):498-513. PMC: 5573992. DOI: 10.1111/japp.12249. View

2.
Resnik D . Embryonic stem cell patents and human dignity. Health Care Anal. 2007; 15(3):211-22. PMC: 2695597. DOI: 10.1007/s10728-007-0045-9. View

3.
Tang L, Zeng Y, Du H, Gong M, Peng J, Zhang B . CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human zygotes using Cas9 protein. Mol Genet Genomics. 2017; 292(3):525-533. DOI: 10.1007/s00438-017-1299-z. View

4.
Petre I . Future Generations and the Justifiability of Germline Engineering. J Med Philos. 2017; 42(3):328-341. DOI: 10.1093/jmp/jhx003. View

5.
Isaacs D . Moral status of the fetus: fetal rights or maternal autonomy?. J Paediatr Child Health. 2003; 39(1):58-9. DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1754.2003.00088.x. View