Cavaliere Giulia
Wellcome Trust PhD Student in Bioethics & Society, Department of Global Health & Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Med Health Care Philos. 2018 Jun;21(2):215-225. doi: 10.1007/s11019-017-9793-y.
This paper explores the ethics of introducing genome-editing technologies as a new reproductive option. In particular, it focuses on whether genome editing can be considered a morally valuable alternative to preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Two arguments against the use of genome editing in reproduction are analysed, namely safety concerns and germline modification. These arguments are then contrasted with arguments in favour of genome editing, in particular with the argument of the child's welfare and the argument of parental reproductive autonomy. In addition to these two arguments, genome editing could be considered as a worthy alternative to PGD as it may not be subjected to some of the moral critiques moved against this technology. Even if these arguments offer sound reasons in favour of introducing genome editing as a new reproductive option, I conclude that these benefits should be balanced against other considerations. More specifically, I maintain that concerns regarding the equality of access to assisted reproduction and the allocation of scarce resources should be addressed prior to the adoption of genome editing as a new reproductive option.
本文探讨了将基因编辑技术作为一种新的生殖选择所涉及的伦理问题。具体而言，它关注基因编辑是否可被视为胚胎植入前基因诊断（PGD）在道德上有价值的替代方案。分析了两条反对在生殖中使用基因编辑的论据，即安全担忧和生殖系修饰。然后将这些论据与支持基因编辑的论据进行对比，特别是与儿童福利论据和父母生殖自主权论据进行对比。除了这两条论据外，基因编辑可被视为PGD的一个有价值的替代方案，因为它可能不会受到一些针对该技术的道德批评。即使这些论据为将基因编辑作为一种新的生殖选择提供了合理理由，但我得出结论，这些益处应与其他考量因素相权衡。更具体地说，我坚持认为，在将基因编辑作为一种新的生殖选择采用之前，应先解决有关辅助生殖服务获取平等和稀缺资源分配的问题。
