John Harris: Genetic Editing

Genome editing is a genetic engineering where some part of DNA are inserted, replaced or edited in a genome of living organisms, and for the focus of this article by John Harris, is about genome editing of human DNA. John Harris’s arguments in this article are genetic editing should be used to protect the embryo from susceptibility to major diseases and prevent other debilitating genetic conditions from being passed on through them to future generations and that there is no need for consent for future generation as long as good decision are made. Furthermore, he argues that not only the assisted reproduction by means of technology affects reproduction, but all kinds of reproduction affects future generations, through passing on genetic material

from both parents, those genes can either be normal or deleterious. That is why the author thinks that they shouldn’t be difficulties in using this emerging technology of gene editing because therapy delayed is therapy denied. More of the arguments made are that if the reproduction was invented by a scientist, but not by evolution, it could have not been very dangerous as it is today because scientists could have reduced the risk of passing on the deleterious gene to the offspring. About the informed consent before using the genetic editing John Harris argues that it is not necessary to consent because there is not relevant people in existence capable of giving or refusing to consent because in reality living people are the one to give consent and parents consent for their minor children.

Assumptions that are made by the author are that all the people need gene editing to be pursued and if possible and safe enough to be used in humans. The reason why the authors think that all people want gene editing is that people will no longer pass on their weakening genetic conditions to their offspring therefore necessary to all human. I think that is not all people want gene editing as a matter of facts, there are movements out there against genetically modified products, and many people are signing petitions about labeling GMO products in grocery. Despite claiming the safety of GMO products, people think that it is unhealthy and don’t think that scientist fully understand what they do or consequences that may arise, people still respect nature as a beneficial and secures their wellbeing and that humans shouldn’t interfere with it. The comparison John Harris made by saying that parents make many decisions for their kids that might affect them in the future without checking on them, is way far from genetic editing that could halt evolution in organisms

forever. The yield of genetic editing for future generations is much more comprehensive than just the parent-kid relationship, so other people will have to be brought in when making the decisions that is why different stakeholders such as scientist, regulator, public and judges should be involved. Furthermore, parents decide for their kids, but who owns future generations? That’s why such scenario of parents and their child wouldn’t work when comes to genetic editing. When parents make the wrong decision affecting their children, there is always a way to adjust and turn things around for their children, which is different from gene editing that will change everything. The idea of continuing scientific investigation on genetic editing is crucial because we might need this technology for different purpose such as modifying other food products needed as the population grows. However, using this technology in humans would be unethical to do, because scientist are not sure of unintended effects that could happen or if human genome editing can easily be reversed. There are several ways to get rid of genetic defect, but the author didn’t mention why we desperately need genetic editing rather than using other means available instead of risking causing more problems we didn’t expect through genome editing, he didn’t also show why it is necessary to use this knowledge at this time than before or why can’t we wait till further studies are made.