The Nuffield Council’s green light for genome editing human embryos defies fundamental human rights law

Bioethics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-227
Author(s):  
Katherine Drabiak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Genome Editing ◽  
Green Light ◽  
Human Embryos ◽  
Human Rights Law

scholarly journals REGULATING GENOME EDITING UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 653-684
Author(s):  
Rumiana Yotova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Genome Editing ◽  
New Technology ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Standards ◽  
Protection Of Embryos

AbstractThis article offers a critical assessment of the role of international human rights law in the regulation of genome editing. Given the rapid scientific developments in the field of genetics, it is important to explore the implications of the human rights framework for the research into and the clinical application of genome editing. The broader normative question is whether the existing human rights standards are sufficient to address the challenges posed by this new technology. It will be argued that while international human rights law does not prohibit genome editing, it imposes important restrictions upon it. However, existing human rights are arguably insufficient to regulate germline genome editing as there are significant loopholes in the protection of embryos. Nor do they fully address the wide-ranging implications of the new technology for society and humankind. It will be suggested that new standards are needed, ideally set out in a new international instrument and supported by an institutional framework, which address the specific challenges posed by this new technology.

scholarly journals Rewriting the human genome, rewriting human rights law? Human rights, human dignity, and human germline modification in the CRISPR era

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Britta C van Beers
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Genome Editing ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
One Dimensional ◽  
Germline Modification ◽  
Legal Frameworks

Abstract In most legal orders, human germline modification is either prohibited or severely restricted. A recurring thought in these legal frameworks is that heritable genome editing would result in practices that are at odds with principles of human rights, such as dignity, justice, and equality. However, now that CRISPR is bringing heritable genome editing within human reach, the question has risen as to whether these human rights bans still make sense. The call is growing louder to lift the ban on heritable genome editing for therapeutic purposes as soon as the technology is safe for introduction in the clinic. This article critically examines these recent proposals from a human rights perspective. First, it examines the question as to how realistic the proposed distinction between the therapeutic and the nontherapeutic uses of human germline modification is in the CRISPR era. Second, it argues that these proposals rely on a one-dimensional understanding of the meaning of human rights for this issue. Finally, it suggests that this one-dimensional understanding paves the way for a regime of self-regulation by the scientific community that leaves little room for public debate on the question as to whether or how human germline modification fits in the long-term aspirations of society.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document