Ethical Dilemmas in Science

Read the Text

The CRISPR gene-editing controversy has had the scientific community divided since the first human embryos were modified in a Chinese laboratory. When the news broke, several research institutions had their funding frozen by government agencies alarmed at the prospect of designer babies. Prominent biologists had their reputations tarnished by association, even when they had merely advocated for theoretical discussion rather than practical application.

Dr. Sarah Chen, a bioethicist at Oxford, had her recent book reviewed by both admirers and detractors who had not actually read it. She argues that society needs to have the ethical implications of new technologies examined by diverse panels before research proceeds. “We cannot simply have decisions made by scientists in isolation,” she wrote. “The public must have its concerns addressed transparently.”

The dilemma is genuine. Parents facing devastating genetic diseases want their children to have the best chance at healthy lives. Yet once the technology is normalised, where does one draw the line? Should height, intelligence, or athletic ability be selected as casually as eye colour? History suggests that once a door is opened, it is rarely closed again.

I recently attended a debate where one speaker had his argument dismantled by a student in the audience. The young woman pointed out that he had his own biases amplified by his privileged background. It was a taste of his own medicine, and he handled it with a stiff upper lip, acknowledging her point with grace. True intellectual honesty, I realised, requires the courage to have one’s own assumptions challenged.

Questions