Human heritable genome editing and its governance: views of scientists and governance professionals

Heritable human genome editing has garnered significant attention in scholarly and lay media, yet questions remain about whether, when, and how heritable genome editing ought to proceed. Drawing on interviews with scientists who use genome editing in their research and professionals engaged in human genome editing governance efforts, we examine their views on the permissibility of heritable genome editing and the governance strategies they see as necessary and realistic. For both issues, we found divergent views from respondents. We place the views of these scientists and governance professionals within the context of the larger bioethical discussion of heritable genome editing governance, along a continuum of hard to soft approaches. These respondents' views highlight the challenges of various hard forms of governance and the potential virtues of soft governance approaches.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
New Genetics and Society
Published
2024-09-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2024.2404061
Citations
5
Primary Topic
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.17
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human heritable genome editing and its governance: views of scientists and governance professionals

Michael A. Flatt, Eric T. Juengst, R. Jean Cadigan, Rami Major et al.
5 citations
New Genetics and Society
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
1.17
article

Human heritable genome editing and its governance: views of scientists and governance professionals

Michael A. Flatt, Eric T. Juengst, R. Jean Cadigan, Rami Major, Margaret Waltz, John M. Conley, Elizabeth K. Branch
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Heritable human genome editing has garnered significant attention in scholarly and lay media, yet questions remain about whether, when, and how heritable genome editing ought to proceed. Drawing on interviews with scientists who use genome editing in their research and professionals engaged in human genome editing governance efforts, we examine their views on the permissibility of heritable genome editing and the governance strategies they see as necessary and realistic. For both issues, we found divergent views from respondents. We place the views of these scientists and governance professionals within the context of the larger bioethical discussion of heritable genome editing governance, along a continuum of hard to soft approaches. These respondents' views highlight the challenges of various hard forms of governance and the potential virtues of soft governance approaches.

New Genetics and SocietyVol. 43(1)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), Cuyahoga Community College (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
1.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.