The Ethical Dilemma Concerning CRISPR

The debate about whether or not CRISPR is ethical has gone on for years. CRISPR is a new advancement in technology that helps us genetically modify DNA to improve overall health. Many people from each side believe in different ideas from the other. The CRISPR debate is a dilemma because there are strengths and weaknesses to both sides. Many see CRISPR as a way to cure people from diseases, or create the perfect child. Others see CRISPR as a mistake or a risk to the population if it gets into the wrong hands. Society must analyze this issue because both sides are valid arguments. Researches are continuously doing research on the topic, but some people believe it is still too early to decide if CRISPR should be used.

I feel that the first key question we should ask is about liberty is important when discussing CRISPR and gene editing. For those who believe CRISPR should not be used, they see it as disrespecting the embryo. Those people also believe that since the child is too young to consent to any health changes, that the child’s genes should not be tampered with. Also, for those people who believe that gene editing should not be allowed, they see that it disrespects the rights and freedom to the child before they are even brought into the world. I agree with those people who think gene editing is wrong. I feel that that a person even in the womb should not have their genes tampered with simply because parents want them to look a specific way. I feel that this also disrupts the child later in life. If a child was told he or she was supposed to look like their parents but doesn’t, they may feel out of place or different, which may put them in a sad or depressed state. I also feel that empathy plays a huge role in the debate. I believe that a child is a person even before birth. Disrupting those rights before they have a chance to make decisions for themselves is sad and cruel. I would feel so upset and ashamed if my husband or significant other wanted to change the looks of our child before they’re even born. There is no fairness to the child. The child could grow up thinking that it does not belong to the family they are living in which can cause psychological issues later in life.

I believe that gene editing with CRISPR should not be used for two main reasons. First, I think that if gene editing got into the wrong hands of powerful people, it could lead to terrorist attacks. CRISPR could wipe out nations across the globe if needed due to genetically engineered bacteria. Also, if other nations wanted rights to use gene editing, wars could break out in order to earn those rights. Secondly, I feel that it is too far when some people may go as far as creating the super human for athletics or for strong armies for protection. Altering genetic information is not only very expensive, but could cause an “addiction” to the process if the person likes the turn out. Liberty and empathy are important factors when determining whether or not we should be using it to help with genetics. I also feel that there is not enough research to fully offer CRISPR to more and more people. The risks are too high and the payout does not seem worth the trouble and expense.

I grew up in a Christian family and with that, I have learned certain principles that would lead me to not agree with CRISPR. I believe that all life from birth to adulthood is precious and should not be tampered with when you were made to look the way God intended. I feel that CRISPR and altering genes is cruel and against the freedom and liberty as well as the empathy to the subject. I feel that we are created by God to be the way that He intends us to look, and that we should not alter that, as it is disrespectful towards Him. God intends us to be how he wants us to be, and if we were to alter our image or genetic appearance, that would go against multiple peoples’ religion. I also believe that since we are already struggling to feed the already overpopulated earth, it seems obvious that we should not genetically modify people to live longer to worsen the need for food. So many countries today are struggling to find food to feed their families. If we were to alter the length of time we live, it would increase the amount of food needed in order to supply those in need. Another big concern with CRISPR is the safety issues. It is not yet known what actual health risks or safety concerns actually exist if we were to try cloning humans. Some believe that cloning humans should be allowed because they think the idea is cool, or an amazing accomplishment. Those people do not have a valid excuse or a good enough reason in my opinion to need genetic engineering as a reason to close themselves. In reality, there is no real reason to have a clone of yourself.

There is plenty of evidence that provides information as to why genetic engineering should be allowed. There is no actual evidence of cloning humans to be safe or necessary to our population. Safety is the main issue in and out of itself. Nothing is worth risking your safety or the safety of others in order to make a copy of yourself. Too many bad things can come from gene editing. We as a people would be risking the abuse of the process in its own. If someone with bad intentions was able to produce a new bacteria as a form of terrorism, it could wipe out the population as we know it today. If CRISPR were to fail, which it has many times before anyone could get it right, it can cause great amounts of damage. Many scientists and other important officials are working daily to prove that genetic engineering should not be allowed. We as a people are unsure of the long term effects of this process. This is a problem for those against CRISPR. With the lack of future knowledge, who’s to say that this won’t kill us in the future? No one, even those who have studied it since it has existed can tell us being completely sure that it is one hundred percent safe.

Some stakeholders like scientists and ethicists are those who disagree with genetic engineering. One issue that they perceive is that some people may become addicted to the idea of modifying oneself, and would want more and more. However, the biggest problem with CRISPR is the lack of ethical support it carries with it. Not only change a person’s physical trait, but it will tamper with future generations to come. Because the future generation is not around to have a say in their own future, fairness and rights are argued. Ethicists are working to prove that genetic modification does not simply affect the patient, it affects the future of us as a people.

If my viewpoint were acceptable in society I feel that many people who oppose CRISPR because of religious and ethical reasons, would feel a little more at ease with the topic. I feel that many of those people would feel better and less angry on the topic. However, with talk of religion, many people may seem to question religion and if it truly is wrong to edit someone’s genetic makeup. From a scientists perspective, he or she may begin to question all they have studied about human genetics before. With the editing of genes, there comes a whole new side of genetics they have to learn about and how it functions in respect to unedited people.

A viewpoint different from mine is the acceptance and want of CRISPR and genetic modifying to be allowed to more and more people. CRISPR can help prevent diseases, can be offered to other species and not only humans, and can also give hope to those who have fallen hopeless for a cure to any ailments they may have. Some stakeholders may be those who actually do the genetic modifying itself. If CRISPR were opposed by multiple people, then the industry of gene editing would suffer. When it comes to liberty and empathy, the people in the industry may not think that those ideas are harmful or important. Those involved must see the idea of making a super human, or a “beautiful human”, too special to worry about ethical concerns. If the debate over CRISPR and its genetic ability were to continue, who knows how far out of control the argument could progress. There could be more arguing over who is right and wrong, lawsuits, and other legal disagreements.