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...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |