CRISPR, APGAR and Cancer Screening: Public Engagement, Controversy and Misaligned Values

There are many calls for public engagement in decision-making around controversial technologies, but far fewer calls for public engagement in deliberation around less controversial interventions. We think the public should be involved in discussing CRISPR, but not in discussing APGAR. Drawing on the case of debates over cancer screening, this paper argues we have things the wrong way around. Given the complex entanglement of fact and value, it is very hard to have high-quality public deliberation over novel technologies. By contrast, it is easier to have deliberation over more mundane technologies. There is, then, good reason to think we should engage in more public deliberation over mundane technologies. The results of this deliberation can then be used in more high-profile cases.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Bioethics
Published
2026-07-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.70158
Primary Topic
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

CRISPR, APGAR and Cancer Screening: Public Engagement, Controversy and Misaligned Values

Stephen John
Bioethics
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
article

CRISPR, APGAR and Cancer Screening: Public Engagement, Controversy and Misaligned Values

Stephen John
article en

Abstract

There are many calls for public engagement in decision-making around controversial technologies, but far fewer calls for public engagement in deliberation around less controversial interventions. We think the public should be involved in discussing CRISPR, but not in discussing APGAR. Drawing on the case of debates over cancer screening, this paper argues we have things the wrong way around. Given the complex entanglement of fact and value, it is very hard to have high-quality public deliberation over novel technologies. By contrast, it is easier to have deliberation over more mundane technologies. There is, then, good reason to think we should engage in more public deliberation over mundane technologies. The results of this deliberation can then be used in more high-profile cases.

Bioethics
University of Cambridge (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
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.