New Technologies, Old Attitudes, and Legislative Rigidity

David Lawrence, John Harris

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)peer-review

Abstract / Description of output

Two genetic technologies capable of making heritable changes to the human genome have revived interest in, and in some quarters a very familiar panic concerning, so-called germline interventions. These technologies are most recently the use of CRISPR/Cas9 to edit genes in non-viable IVF zygotes and Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy (MRT). The possibility of using either of these techniques in humans has encountered the most violent hostility and suspicion. Here, we counter the stance of the US NIH and its supporters by showing that differing global moralities are free to exist unimpeded under international biolaw regimes, which do not in any way represent unified opinion against such technologies. Furthermore, we suggest a more rational approach to evaluating them through analysis of similar technologies which have caused past controversy.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationOxford Handbook on the Law and Regulation of Technology
EditorsRoger Brownsword, Eloise Scotford, Karen Yeung
PublisherOxford University Press
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'New Technologies, Old Attitudes, and Legislative Rigidity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this