Regulating genetic engineering guided by human dignity, not genetic essentialism
(2021) In Politics and the Life Sciences 41(1). p.60-75- Abstract
- How might a liberal democratic community best regulate human genetic engineering? Relevant debates widely deploy the usually undefined term “human dignity.” Its indeterminacy in meaning and use renders it useless as a guiding principle. In this article, I reject the human genome as somehow invested with a moral status, a position I call “genetic essentialism.” I explain why a critique of genetic essentialism is not a strawman and argue against defining human rights in terms of genetic essentialism. As an alternative, I propose dignity as the decisional autonomy of future persons, held in trust by the current generation. I show why a future person could be expected to have an interest in decisional autonomy and how popular deliberation,... (More)
- How might a liberal democratic community best regulate human genetic engineering? Relevant debates widely deploy the usually undefined term “human dignity.” Its indeterminacy in meaning and use renders it useless as a guiding principle. In this article, I reject the human genome as somehow invested with a moral status, a position I call “genetic essentialism.” I explain why a critique of genetic essentialism is not a strawman and argue against defining human rights in terms of genetic essentialism. As an alternative, I propose dignity as the decisional autonomy of future persons, held in trust by the current generation. I show why a future person could be expected to have an interest in decisional autonomy and how popular deliberation, combined with expert medical and bioethical opinion, could generate principled agreement on how the decisional autonomy of future persons might be configured at the point of genetic engineering. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/c5e5e7fe-5941-4f97-92b9-e1fe24345748
- author
- Gregg, Benjamin LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2021
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Decisional autonomy, Dignity, Future persons, Human genetic engineering, Moral status of the human genome, Regulation, Social construction, Human rights, Beslutsautonomi, Värdighet, Framtida personer, Mänsklig genteknik, Det mänskliga genomets moraliska status, Reglering, Social konstruktion, Mänskliga rättigheter
- in
- Politics and the Life Sciences
- volume
- 41
- issue
- 1
- pages
- 16 pages
- publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85121102871
- ISSN
- 0730-9384
- DOI
- 10.1017/pls.2021.29
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- c5e5e7fe-5941-4f97-92b9-e1fe24345748
- date added to LUP
- 2022-02-01 16:48:05
- date last changed
- 2022-08-30 17:58:29
@article{c5e5e7fe-5941-4f97-92b9-e1fe24345748,
abstract = {{How might a liberal democratic community best regulate human genetic engineering? Relevant debates widely deploy the usually undefined term “human dignity.” Its indeterminacy in meaning and use renders it useless as a guiding principle. In this article, I reject the human genome as somehow invested with a moral status, a position I call “genetic essentialism.” I explain why a critique of genetic essentialism is not a strawman and argue against defining human rights in terms of genetic essentialism. As an alternative, I propose dignity as the decisional autonomy of future persons, held in trust by the current generation. I show why a future person could be expected to have an interest in decisional autonomy and how popular deliberation, combined with expert medical and bioethical opinion, could generate principled agreement on how the decisional autonomy of future persons might be configured at the point of genetic engineering.}},
author = {{Gregg, Benjamin}},
issn = {{0730-9384}},
keywords = {{Decisional autonomy; Dignity; Future persons; Human genetic engineering; Moral status of the human genome; Regulation; Social construction; Human rights; Beslutsautonomi; Värdighet; Framtida personer; Mänsklig genteknik; Det mänskliga genomets moraliska status; Reglering; Social konstruktion; Mänskliga rättigheter}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{1}},
pages = {{60--75}},
publisher = {{Cambridge University Press}},
series = {{Politics and the Life Sciences}},
title = {{Regulating genetic engineering guided by human dignity, not genetic essentialism}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pls.2021.29}},
doi = {{10.1017/pls.2021.29}},
volume = {{41}},
year = {{2021}},
}