Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations

Revising Humans: U.S. Constitution Provides Framework For Debate On Genetic Engineering Of Human Beings

Date:
February 27, 2005
Source:
Georgia Institute Of Technology
Summary:
The U.S. Constitution may not provide direct answers to policy questions about the genetic engineering of human beings, but it does offer shared values that can help frame the debate about this developing technology, according to a Georgia Institute of Technology professor.

Though the U.S. Constitution does directly address policy questions about genetic engineering of humans, it does offer shared values that can help frame the debate, Georgia Tech professor Roberta Berry told scientists attending the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting.
Credit: Image courtesy of Georgia Institute Of Technology

The U.S. Constitution may not provide direct answers to policy questions about the genetic engineering of human beings, but it does offer shared values that can help frame the debate about this developing technology, according to a Georgia Institute of Technology professor.

"One of the chief difficulties in understanding and addressing the policy and ethical issues surrounding genetic engineering of humans is the novelty of this technology," said Roberta Berry, an associate professor of public policy. "We've never before had the opportunity to revise our biological constitution in this way. So it's difficult to find a framework for addressing this."

But the U.S. Constitution provides a set of values, or foundational norms -- such as the promotion of welfare, science and the useful arts, the protection of liberty and equal protection -- that are part of Americans' shared political heritage, Berry noted. Disagreement often arises about how to understand and apply these norms in certain cases (e.g, embryonic stem cell research), and debate ensues.

"We have this store of policy discussion and working things out around certain issues," Berry said. "We can look to these discussions because they all draw upon these constitutional norms, which will be evoked by the genetic engineering debate. Then we can start to chip away at the novelty challenge, making it a more familiar problem."

Berry will discuss her ideas in a presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science on Feb. 18 in Washington, D.C., in a session titled "Beginning and End-of-Life Technologies and Core Constitutional Values."

Though genetic engineering of human beings may seem the stuff of science fiction, researchers have already created human artificial chromosomes to produce transgenic animals and to administer gene therapy to living humans. Some observers believe gene modules copied from known natural genes that seem to predispose humans to certain desirable features could be inserted on these synthetic chromosomes and introduced into a human ovum or zygote, Berry said. These observers believe research toward accomplishing safe genetic engineering of human beings in this way could get under way in the near future, while others maintain that such a step is still many decades away, if it ever could be feasible, she added.

Nevertheless, the public policy debate about genetic engineering of humans is likely to intensify over the next 10 years, Berry predicted, expanding from familiar public policy questions of medical risk and benefit to enter the realm of novelty.

"We will face the fact that defining the benefits of this technology is value-laden," Berry said. "It won't be a simple matter to say, €˜It's better to be taller rather than shorter, or it's better to have a strong memory than to be forgetful.' People will disagree about the relative importance of features and the deeper questions on human relationships -- how we treat each other.

"Should we devote ourselves to conscious efforts to design people according to a superior set of criteria? What is a superior human being? We'll draw upon all sorts of past experience with eugenics, people with disabilities and various affiliations," she added.

It is then she hopes the public policy debate will center on constitutional norms.

"Genetic engineering of humans raises questions about general welfare, procreative liberty, the advancement of science and the useful arts, and when it's for our benefit and when it's no longer a benefit because it violates other values we hold dear," Berry explained. "We will figure it out over time and over our shared history together. Then we'll have a shared framework for a policy debate. It will shine light on this novel and complex problem and tell us what we should be debating."

Policymakers are likely to debate the question of whether genetic engineering promotes or harms the welfare of future children and the public at large, Berry said.

"Genetic engineering will be the focal point of disagreement about whether parents, if they are permitted to engineer their children, will be exercising their rights to raise their children as they see fit, or will be engaged in child abuse or inappropriate efforts to control rather than educate their children -- thus requiring the intervention of the government to protect and promote the welfare of these future children," she explained.

The Constitution also calls for the advancement of science, technology and the "useful" arts, and such activities are generally supported by governmental and non-governmental programs, Berry noted.

"But controversy has arisen about whether other values -- in particular, the safety of human subjects and the sanctity of human life -- have been given short shrift in the push to make scientific and technological breakthroughs," she added. "Genetic engineering will be one focal point of debate about this interface between science, technology and society because it will force consideration of the value and meaning of human life itself."

Questions regarding the protection of liberty -- in particular freedom of individual choice in procreation -- and the equal protection of the law are other issues that may be debated within the framework of constitutional norms, Berry said. Some people will argue that genetic engineering falls within the realm of protected reproductive liberties, while others will claim that future children have the right to not be subjected to the risks of genetic engineering procedures gone wrong, or be subject to parental control over their features. Still others are likely to argue that society will be divided by biological endowment if genetic engineering is only available to those who can afford it, she added.

Debate over genetic engineering of humans will be ongoing for future generations. "This issue won't go away," Berry said. "We'll have to deal with whether or how it's used and refined. We need to make a first tentative step now toward coping with this issue because the prospect of this technology is so imminent."

She is hopeful the debate will be open and reflective. "I'd like to see a wide variety of people thinking about this to arrive at a resolution," Berry said. "I don't want this debate to evolve into isolated encampments in which people hold their own views and won't listen to others."


Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Georgia Institute Of Technology. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.


Cite This Page:

Georgia Institute Of Technology. "Revising Humans: U.S. Constitution Provides Framework For Debate On Genetic Engineering Of Human Beings." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 27 February 2005. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050223145533.htm>.
Georgia Institute Of Technology. (2005, February 27). Revising Humans: U.S. Constitution Provides Framework For Debate On Genetic Engineering Of Human Beings. ScienceDaily. Retrieved July 22, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050223145533.htm
Georgia Institute Of Technology. "Revising Humans: U.S. Constitution Provides Framework For Debate On Genetic Engineering Of Human Beings." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050223145533.htm (accessed July 22, 2014).

Share This




More Plants & Animals News

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations


Featured Videos

from AP, Reuters, AFP, and other news services

Michigan Plant's Goal: Flower and Die

Michigan Plant's Goal: Flower and Die

AP (July 22, 2014) An 80-year-old agave plant, which is blooming for the first and only time at a University of Michigan conservatory, will die when it's done (July 22) Video provided by AP
Powered by NewsLook.com
San Diego Zoo Welcomes New, Rare Rhino Calf

San Diego Zoo Welcomes New, Rare Rhino Calf

Reuters - US Online Video (July 21, 2014) An endangered black rhino baby is the newest resident at the San Diego Zoo. Sasha Salama reports. Video provided by Reuters
Powered by NewsLook.com
Shark Sightings a Big Catch for Cape Tourism

Shark Sightings a Big Catch for Cape Tourism

AP (July 21, 2014) A rise in shark sightings along the shores of Chatham, Massachusetts is driving a surge of eager vacationers to the beach town looking to catch a glimpse of a great white. (July 21) Video provided by AP
Powered by NewsLook.com
$23.6 Billion Awarded To Widow In Smoking Lawsuit

$23.6 Billion Awarded To Widow In Smoking Lawsuit

Newsy (July 20, 2014) Cynthia Robinson claims R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company hid the health and addiction risks of its products, leading to the death of her husband in 1996. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com

Search ScienceDaily

Number of stories in archives: 140,361

Find with keyword(s):
Enter a keyword or phrase to search ScienceDaily for related topics and research stories.

Save/Print:
Share:

Breaking News:
from the past week

In Other News

... from NewsDaily.com

Science News

Health News

Environment News

Technology News



Save/Print:
Share:

Free Subscriptions


Get the latest science news with ScienceDaily's free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:

Get Social & Mobile


Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks and mobile apps:

Have Feedback?


Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
Mobile: iPhone Android Web
Follow: Facebook Twitter Google+
Subscribe: RSS Feeds Email Newsletters
Latest Headlines Health & Medicine Mind & Brain Space & Time Matter & Energy Computers & Math Plants & Animals Earth & Climate Fossils & Ruins