Playing God?Part One: The Ethics of Genetic Manipulation

2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 1

Phil. 321:Social Ethics

Spring 2009

Lawrence M. HinmanCo-Director,

Center for Ethics in Science & TechnologyProfessor of PhilosophyUniversity of San Diego

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

2/24/2009 Lawrence M. Hinman 3

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/

Points of Intervention

2/24/2009 ©Lawrence M. Hinman 4

Points of Intervention

Action Example Active killing?

Consent?Parent/child

Active exterminationof a population

Nazi extermination of Jews,Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally and physically disabled

Yes 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

No Yes/Maybe

Arguments in support of genetic manipulation

Libertarian: It is a matter of individual

liberty to decide what genetic enhancements one wants.

2/24/2009 ©Lawrence M. Hinman 5

Utilitarian: • produces overall a better group of

people (eugenics)

Arguments Against Genetic Manipulation

The Safety Argument • Too risky at this time—we simply don’t know enough to do this safelyThe Slippery Slope Argument • Leads to possible abuses, especially eugenicsThe Respect for Autonomy Argument• Violates child’s autonomy by choosing a future for him/her, sometimes using

the child as a mere meansThe 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 19th and early 20th 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

2/24/2009 ©Lawrence M. Hinman 9

Eugenics gained favor with many, including George Bernard Shaw, the famous English playwright.

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.

2/24/2009 ©Lawrence M. Hinman 15

Michael J. Sandel is the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor

of Government at Harvard University,

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 KeeperKazuo Ishiguro, Never Let Me Go

2/23/2009 ©Lawrence M. Hinman 25