Is CRISPR human genome editing technology ethical?

Encyclopedia of Opinion

Question: Is CRISPR human genome editing technology ethical?
Position‹3 of 3: CRISPR is ethical under all conditions
Argument: CRISPR is ethical under all conditions

There are currently no documented arguments for CRISPR use being ethical under all conditions.

The argument

At the moment, there is no documentation of arguments which claim that using CRISPR is ethical under all conditions. All currently circulating arguments believe that the use of CRISPR is unethical when it is used on certain individuals or for certain purposes. It seems that the vast majority of arguments hold that using CRISPR for "enhancement" (like intelligence, bigger muscles, height, etc.) and not just for disease treatment is unethical. Some individuals like Josiah Zayner believe that it's ethical for CRISPR to be used for enhancement (e.g. bigger muscles) and for CRISPR to be used for self-experimentation, which implies that CRISPR ethics could have much fewer conditions than more popular positions demand. Yet, this refers specifically to using CRISPR on non-embryos, so some conditions are still in place. Others like Juan Enriquez and Steve Gullans believe genetic enhancement is very likely to occur in the future, but do not weigh in on the ethics of it. Arguments for CRISPR use being ethical under all conditions could arise as CRISPR is further developed.

Premises

[P1]At present no documented argument holds that CRISPR is ethical under absolutely all conditions; even permissive voices keep some limits. [P2] Figures like Josiah Zayner defend CRISPR for enhancement and self-experimentation, implying far fewer ethical conditions than most allow, though still excluding embryos. [P3] Others like Enriquez and Gullans expect genetic enhancement to become routine, so a fully unconditional case could emerge as the technology develops. [C] Therefore, as CRISPR matures, the view that CRISPR is ethical under all conditions may become defensible.

Counter-arguments

Critics reply that the passage itself concedes there is no documented argument for CRISPR being ethical under all conditions, so the position is essentially unsupported even by its own account. 'Under all conditions' would sanction uses that virtually all ethicists reject. Most centrally, heritable germline editing for enhancement raises unresolved safety problems (off-target effects, mosaicism), consent problems (future generations cannot consent), and equity problems (a genetic divide between those who can afford enhancement and those who cannot). The global condemnation of the He Jiankui gene-edited-babies case reflects a strong consensus that some CRISPR uses are unethical — which directly contradicts an 'ethical under all conditions' claim.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The passage itself concedes there is no documented argument for CRISPR being ethical under all conditions, so the position is essentially unsupported even by its own account. [Rejecting P2] 'Under all conditions' would sanction heritable germline enhancement, which raises unresolved safety (off-target effects, mosaicism), consent (future generations cannot consent) and equity concerns that virtually all ethicists reject. [Rejecting P3] The global condemnation of the He Jiankui gene-edited-babies case reflects a strong consensus that some CRISPR uses are unethical, contradicting an 'ethical under all conditions' claim.