Affiliation:
1. School of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
2. African Health Research Flagship, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Abstract
Human germline editing holds much promise for improving people’s lives, but at the same time this novel biotechnology raises ethical and legal questions. The South African ethics regulatory environment is problematic, as it prohibits all research on, and the clinical application of, human germline editing. By contrast, the South African legal regulatory environment allows a regulatory path that would, in principle, permit research on human germline editing. However, the legal regulation of the clinical application of human germline editing is uncertain. As such, the current ethical and legal positions in South Africa are in need of reform. Five guiding principles – aligned with the values of the Constitution – are proposed to guide ethical and legal policy reform regarding human germline editing in South Africa: (1) Given its potential to improve the lives of the people of South Africa, human germline editing should be regulated, not banned. (2) Human germline editing clinical applications should only be made accessible to the public if they are proven to be safe and effective. (3) Non-therapeutic human germline editing may be permissible, and should be regulated in the same way as therapeutic human germline editing. (4) The decision on whether to use germline gene editing on a prospective child, should, subject to Principle 2, be left to the prospective parents. (5) Concerns about exacerbating social inequalities should be addressed by measures to increase access. In conclusion, recommendations are made to policymakers and scientists contemplating research in this field.
Funder
NInyuvesi Yakwazulu-Natali
Publisher
Academy of Science of South Africa
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Reference47 articles.
1. Baltimore D, Berg P, Botchan M, Carroll D, Charo RA, Church G, et al. A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germ line gene modification. Science. 2015;348(6230):36-38. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab1028
2. Normile D. CRISPR bombshell: Chinese researcher claims to have created gene-edited twins. ScienceMag. 2018 November 26 [cited 2019 Jul 18]. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw1839
3. Association for Responsible Research and Innovation in Genome Editing. Common statement between the Association for Responsible Research and Innovation in Genome Editing (ARRIGE), the Genome Writers Guild (GWG) and the Japanese Society for Genome Editing (JSGE) [document on the Internet]. c2019 [cited 2019 Jul 18]. Available from: https://arrige.org/Common_statement_Arrige_GWG_JSGE.pdf
4. World Health Organization. WHO expert panel paves way for strong international governance on human genome editing [webpage on the Internet]. c2019 [cited 2019 Jul 18]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/19-03-2019-who-expert-panel-paves-way-for-stronginternational-governance-on-human-genome-editing
5. Germline editing: time for discussion. Nat Med. 2015;21(4):295. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.3845
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献