Playing God? Part One: The Ethics of Genetic Manipulation Phil. 321: Social Ethics Spring 2009 Lawrence M. Hinman Co-Director, Center for Ethics in Science & Technology Professor of Philosophy University of San Diego 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 1
Overview The Current State of Affairs Points of Intervention The Arguments for Genetic Manipulation The Arguments against Genetic Manipulation Case Studies 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 2
The Human Genome Project The completion of the Human Genome Project provides a scientific foundation for genetic manipulation. For the first time, scientists had a map of (most of the) human genome. http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/hgp/ 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 3
Action Points of Intervention Points of Intervention Active extermination of a population Example Nazi extermination of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally and physically disabled Active killing? Yes Consent? Parent/child No/ DNA Infanticide after birth Killing female first born in China Yes Yes/ No Abortion Killing embryo in utero after genetic testing Yes Yes/ No Forced Sterilization Involuntary sterilization of poor women No No/ DNA IVF embryo selection (PGD) Only implanting selected embryos No Yes/ No In vitro genetic manipulation Correcting abnormalities through in utero intervention No Yes/ No Genetic manipulation Gene therapy & stem cell therapy in children and adults 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 4 No Yes/ Maybe
Arguments in support of genetic manipulation Utilitarian: produces overall a better group of people (eugenics) Libertarian: It is a matter of individual liberty to decide what genetic enhancements one wants. 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 5
Arguments Against Genetic Manipulation The Safety Argument Too risky at this time we simply don t know enough to do this safely The Slippery Slope Argument Leads to possible abuses, especially eugenics The Respect for Autonomy Argument Violates child s autonomy by choosing a future for him/her, sometimes using the child as a mere means The Hubris Argument Playing God takes on privileged more appropriate for God than human beings The giftedness argument (Sandel) The Natural Law Argument Genetic manipulation involves going against the natural order, violating natural law. 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 6
The Safety Argument There is much that we do not understand about human genes. Altering genes may result in changes that we do not expect. Germline Engineering: If these changes can be passed down to future generations, there is a possibility of catastrophic results. We may create pressure for people to use these techniques. 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 7
The Slippery Slope to Eugenics: Some History: Galton In the late 19 th and early 20 th century, a number of groups most notably later in the twentieth century, the Nazis tried to control the development of the human race through organized breeding programs: eugenics. Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911) read his paper Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope and Aims to a meeting of the Sociological Society at the London School of Economics on May 16th, 1904, 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 8
Eugenics and G. B. Shaw Eugenics gained favor with many, including George Bernard Shaw, the famous English playwright. 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 9
Herbert Spencer Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) was an English philosopher who developed the notion of survival of the fittest as a doctrine describing human evolution. 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 10
Eugenics and Birth Control The rise of the birth control movement, championed by Margaret Sanger, derived primarily from a desire to free women from unwanted pregnancies. In itself, it was not primarily a eugenics movement. However, the birth control movement became intertwined with the eugenics movement, sharing both advocates and critics.
G. K. Chesterton G. K Chesterton (1874-1936) was one of the most outspoken critics of the eugenics movement in Great Britain.
Eugenics in California The Nazis looked to the California eugenics programs as a model.
The Respect for Autonomy Argument Genetic manipulation, performed either in utero or during childhood, would seem to threaten the right to make one s own choices. The President s Council on Bioethics has focused on issues of human dignity and respect for autonomy. 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 14
The Hubris Argument: Playing God? Some critics maintain that altering genes is playing God. This version of the argument is not primarily consequentialist but rather either deontological or character-based. Michael Sandel, for example, argues that we should accepted the gifted character of existence and not try to control everything. The attempt at such control is an example of overreaching the bounds of the properly human. Michael J. Sandel is the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Government at Harvard University, 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 15
The Natural Law Argument Genetic manipulation strikes many people as profoundly unnatural, against the natural order and (sometimes) against God s order. Is this merely a subjective feeling, shared by some but not all, or does it have some stronger foundation? This argument seems in danger of proving either too much or too little; Many things which seem unnatural, such as surgery, are commonly accepted today. What allows us to single out this particular thing as morally wrong? 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 16
Three Questions about Restrictions In considering the issue of genetic manipulation, we are faced with three distinct but closely related questions: What restrictions, if any, are appropriate in regard to the use of genetic manipulation? To whom should these restrictions apply? Individuals Professionals Who, if anyone, is responsible for enforcing these restrictions? Individual Professional organizations The government 2/23/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 17
What Kind of Restrictions? What regulation should apply to genetic manipulation? The free market/individual liberty model Individuals should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they do not infringe on the liberty of others. The government regulation model Genetic manipulation should not be permitted unless explicitly approved by the government. The government should ban all attempts at genetic manipulation. The professional regulation model Genetic manipulation should be monitored and controlled by appropriate professional organizations of scientists, physicians, and others. 2/23/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 18
Choosing Between Life Paths Genetic manipulation is very different from abortion: Abortion is a matter of life or death, of deciding whether a fetus lives or dies. Genetic manipulation is a matter of deciding which life an individual may have by altering the individual s genes; It is a matter of which future the fetus is going to have. Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is in between these two, allowing the choice of which embryo should be implanted. 2/23/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 19
Scenario #1: Designer Babies Imagine that it is possible to decide height, skin color, hair color, eye color, sex and other physical characteristics of a newly-conceived child. Should parents be allowed to change these characteristics if they choose? Will this lead to designer babies? To uniformity? Will this deplete the gene pool? 2/23/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 20
Scenario #2: Sexual Orientation Imagine that: Scientists have isolated the genes that predispose sexual orientation; You are going to have a child; Tests have determined that your child will probably be gay. Your doctor asks you: would you like us to alter the genes that predispose toward sexual orientation so that the child will not be gay? Further assume that you have nothing against gays, but know that overall a gay person will face more discrimination and suffering all other things being equal than someone who is heterosexual. What should you do? 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 21
Scenario #3: Sexual Orientation Imagine scenario #2 with the following changes: Doctors have determined that your child will have a heterosexual orientation; You are gay. If the doctor offered to alter the genes so that your child would be gay as well, what should you do? 2/23/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 22
Scenario #4: Achondroplasia You are pregnant, and a routine test reveals that your child has a particular gene that results in achondroplasia, a form of dwarfism. The doctor asks you whether you want to have the gene altered so that the child s height is normal. What should you do? 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 23
Scenario #5: Achondroplasia Imagine the scenario is similar to that given in #4, except that you and your spouse are both dwarfs and the doctor tells you, after a routine test, that your baby will be normal height. A friend, aware that it may be difficult if both parents are dwarfs and the child is not, suggests that you ask that the child s genes be altered so that the child too will be a dwarf. What should you do? 2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 24
Scenario #6: A Savior Baby A boy has been born to a British couple who want to use stem cells from his umbilical cord to treat an older brother with a life threatening blood disorder. Michelle and Jayson Whitaker's baby, Jamie, was genetically selected while he was still an embryo to be a near perfect match to four-year-old Charlie. The couple went to an American clinic for test tube baby treatment because the selection procedure is not allowed in the UK. Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/issues/designer_babies/ Also see Jodi Picoult, My Sister s Keeper Kazuo Ishiguro, Never Let Me Go 2/23/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 25