Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy

Abstract Background Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats-associated (CRISPR-Cas) technology may allow for efficient and highly targeted gene editing in single-cell embryos. This possibility brings human germline editing into the focus of ethical and legal debates again. Main bod...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sebastian Schleidgen, Hans-Georg Dederer, Susan Sgodda, Stefan Cravcisin, Luca Lüneburg, Tobias Cantz, Thomas Heinemann
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-09-01
Series:BMC Medical Ethics
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12910-020-00487-1
id doaj-4bcfc85211fd4726887633ec0ada8df8
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4bcfc85211fd4726887633ec0ada8df82020-11-25T03:57:43ZengBMCBMC Medical Ethics1472-69392020-09-0121111210.1186/s12910-020-00487-1Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacySebastian Schleidgen0Hans-Georg Dederer1Susan Sgodda2Stefan Cravcisin3Luca Lüneburg4Tobias Cantz5Thomas Heinemann6Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Institute of Philosophy, FernUniversität in HagenFaculty of Law, University of PassauTranslational Hepatology and Stem Cell Biology, REBIRTH Center for Translational Regenerative Medicine, Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical SchoolFaculty of Law, University of PassauFaculty of Law, University of PassauTranslational Hepatology and Stem Cell Biology, REBIRTH Center for Translational Regenerative Medicine, Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical SchoolFaculty of Nursing Science, University of Philosophy and Theology VallendarAbstract Background Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats-associated (CRISPR-Cas) technology may allow for efficient and highly targeted gene editing in single-cell embryos. This possibility brings human germline editing into the focus of ethical and legal debates again. Main body Against this background, we explore essential ethical and legal questions of interventions into the human germline by means of CRISPR-Cas: How should issues of risk and uncertainty be handled? What responsibilities arise regarding future generations? Under which conditions can germline editing measures be therapeutically legitimized? For this purpose, we refer to a scenario anticipating potential further development in CRISPR-Cas technology implying improved accuracy and exclusion of germline transmission to future generations. We show that, if certain concepts regarding germline editing are clarified, under such conditions a categorical prohibition of one-generation germline editing of single-cell embryos appears not to be ethically or legally justifiable. Conclusion These findings are important prerequisites for the international debate on the ethical and legal justification of germline interventions in the human embryo as well as for the harmonization of international legal standards.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12910-020-00487-1Germline therapyHuman embryosTherapeutic legitimizationResponsibility for future generationsRisks
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sebastian Schleidgen
Hans-Georg Dederer
Susan Sgodda
Stefan Cravcisin
Luca Lüneburg
Tobias Cantz
Thomas Heinemann
spellingShingle Sebastian Schleidgen
Hans-Georg Dederer
Susan Sgodda
Stefan Cravcisin
Luca Lüneburg
Tobias Cantz
Thomas Heinemann
Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
BMC Medical Ethics
Germline therapy
Human embryos
Therapeutic legitimization
Responsibility for future generations
Risks
author_facet Sebastian Schleidgen
Hans-Georg Dederer
Susan Sgodda
Stefan Cravcisin
Luca Lüneburg
Tobias Cantz
Thomas Heinemann
author_sort Sebastian Schleidgen
title Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
title_short Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
title_full Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
title_fullStr Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
title_full_unstemmed Human germline editing in the era of CRISPR-Cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
title_sort human germline editing in the era of crispr-cas: risk and uncertainty, inter-generational responsibility, therapeutic legitimacy
publisher BMC
series BMC Medical Ethics
issn 1472-6939
publishDate 2020-09-01
description Abstract Background Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats-associated (CRISPR-Cas) technology may allow for efficient and highly targeted gene editing in single-cell embryos. This possibility brings human germline editing into the focus of ethical and legal debates again. Main body Against this background, we explore essential ethical and legal questions of interventions into the human germline by means of CRISPR-Cas: How should issues of risk and uncertainty be handled? What responsibilities arise regarding future generations? Under which conditions can germline editing measures be therapeutically legitimized? For this purpose, we refer to a scenario anticipating potential further development in CRISPR-Cas technology implying improved accuracy and exclusion of germline transmission to future generations. We show that, if certain concepts regarding germline editing are clarified, under such conditions a categorical prohibition of one-generation germline editing of single-cell embryos appears not to be ethically or legally justifiable. Conclusion These findings are important prerequisites for the international debate on the ethical and legal justification of germline interventions in the human embryo as well as for the harmonization of international legal standards.
topic Germline therapy
Human embryos
Therapeutic legitimization
Responsibility for future generations
Risks
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12910-020-00487-1
work_keys_str_mv AT sebastianschleidgen humangermlineeditingintheeraofcrisprcasriskanduncertaintyintergenerationalresponsibilitytherapeuticlegitimacy
AT hansgeorgdederer humangermlineeditingintheeraofcrisprcasriskanduncertaintyintergenerationalresponsibilitytherapeuticlegitimacy
AT susansgodda humangermlineeditingintheeraofcrisprcasriskanduncertaintyintergenerationalresponsibilitytherapeuticlegitimacy
AT stefancravcisin humangermlineeditingintheeraofcrisprcasriskanduncertaintyintergenerationalresponsibilitytherapeuticlegitimacy
AT lucaluneburg humangermlineeditingintheeraofcrisprcasriskanduncertaintyintergenerationalresponsibilitytherapeuticlegitimacy
AT tobiascantz humangermlineeditingintheeraofcrisprcasriskanduncertaintyintergenerationalresponsibilitytherapeuticlegitimacy
AT thomasheinemann humangermlineeditingintheeraofcrisprcasriskanduncertaintyintergenerationalresponsibilitytherapeuticlegitimacy
_version_ 1724459084090966016