Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
recognition that large mammals can indeed be cloned. Citing a variety
of religious and ethical arguments, these opponents of cloning and other
technologies are vigorous but seemingly ineffectual, and their ranks thin
as new possible accomplishments appear on the horizon. For example,
the ranks of abortion foes split over stem cell research as it became
apparent that stem cells hold serious possibilities for a wide variety of
treatments. The innocent personhood of the fertilized egg was suddenly
not quite so sanctified when treatment for the more mature was the issue
and not a woman's control over her body.
Such issues are the stuff of contemporary ethics, and the timeliness of
our discussions gives rise to a sense of both urgency and an opportunity
to affect the course of action. If we could only get human nature right,
or lay hold of the human condition, we might—to modify Karl Marx a
little—be able to change the world by describing it. But there is a nagging
sense of tragic limitations to our efforts: are we the actors we would like
to think we are or the chorus watching the world slip by?
Consequently, it is difficult to know what to say about genetic engi-
neering. Events and the ambitions they generate overtake today's ethics
even while today's reflections have attempted to deal only with what
happened yesterday. It appears we do not even have the time for tragedy.
A Commonplace about Genetic Engineering
An example of this dynamic can be found in the discussion of genetic
therapy and engineering. For some time, it has been commonplace to
argue that genetic therapy is ethically acceptable, while genetic enhance-
ment should be forbidden. Somatic genetic therapy is acceptable because,
by analogy with other therapies, it focuses on treating the individual with
consequences that are limited to that individual. On the other hand, germ
line genetic therapy and genetic enhancement are not acceptable. Germ
line genetic therapy refers to changing an inheritable but undesirable
genetic trait, while genetic enhancement usually means the conscious
attempt to improve an existing “normal” human genome. The effects of
both are inherited, and thus they may affect future generations in ways
that we cannot foresee or evaluate. Hence, there is much more at stake
than treating the individual, and our ignorance of possible outcomes is
the basis for a seemingly compelling “No.”
