Article info
PDFCommentary
The moral argument for heritable genome editing requires an inappropriately deterministic view of genetics
- Correspondence to Professor Anneke M Lucassen, Department of Clinical Ethics and Law, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton so165ya, UK; a.m.lucassen{at}soton.ac.uk
Citation
The moral argument for heritable genome editing requires an inappropriately deterministic view of genetics
Publication history
- Received January 28, 2019
- Accepted January 31, 2019
- First published March 12, 2019.
Online issue publication
August 27, 2019
Article Versions
- Previous version (12 March 2019).
- Previous version (5 August 2019).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Moral reasons to edit the human genome: picking up from the Nuffield report
- Genome editing, Goldilocks and polygenic risk scores
- Future of global regulation of human genome editing: a South African perspective on the WHO Draft Governance Framework on Human Genome Editing
- Guerrilla eugenics: gene drives in heritable human genome editing
- Heritable human genome editing is ‘currently not permitted’, but it is no longer ‘prohibited’: so says the ISSCR
- We need to talk about imperatives
- Frailty, lifestyle, genetics and dementia risk
- Goldilocks and the two principles. A response to Gyngell et al
- Genomic basis of atrial fibrillation
- Genomics for paediatricians: promises and pitfalls