Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty pp 1–14Cite as

Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty

An Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Genome editing techniques are seen to be at the frontier of current research in the field of emerging biotechnologies (The Academy of Medical Sciences et al. 2015; Leopoldina et al. 2015; BBAW 2015; Academy of Sciences Leopoldina 2017). However, such biotechnological research is tensioned at the interface of science, technology and society (Braun and Dabrock 2016; Braun and Dabrock 2017). On the one hand, this means that it offers a tremendous potential to provide new concepts, methods and – in the long run – novel applications for urgent challenges and needs within society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Academy of Sciences Leopoldina. 2017. Ethical and Legal Assessment of Genome Editing in Research on Human Cells. https://www.leopoldina.org/uploads/tx_leopublication/2017_Diskussionspapier_GenomeEditing.pdf. Accessed 10 January 2017.

  • Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, et al. 2015. The Opportunities and Limits of Genome Editing. Halle: Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, et al.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltimore, David, et al. 2015. A Prudent Path forward for Genomic Engineering and Germline Gene Modification. Science 348: 36–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities (BBAW). 2015. Human Genome Surgery – towards a Responsible Evaluation of a New Technology: Analysis by the Interdisciplinary Research Group Gene Technology Report. Berlin: Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnbacher, Dieter. 2014. Naturalness. Is the “Natural” Preferable to the “Artificial”? Blue Ridge Summit: UPA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, Matthias, and Peter Dabrock. 2016. “I bet you won’t”: The Science–Society Wager on Gene Editing Techniques. EMBO Reports 17: 279–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, Matthias, and Peter Dabrock. 2017. Mind the Gaps! Towards an Ethical Framework for Genome Editing. EMBO Reports 19: 197–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, Arthur L., et al. 2015. No Time to Waste – the Ethical Challenges Created by CRISPR. EMBO Reports 16: 1421–1426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center for Genetics and Society. 2015. CRISPR/Cas Gene-Editing Technique Holds Great Promise, but Research Moratorium Makes Sense Pending Further Study. http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=8759. Accessed 31 December 2016.

  • Cyranowski, David, and Sara Reardon. 2015. Embryo Editing Sparks Epic Debate. Nature 520: 593–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabrock, Peter. 2009. Playing God? Synthetic Biology as a Theological and Ethical Challenge. Systems and Synthetic Biology 3: 47–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabrock, Peter, et al. 2013. A Primer to ‘Bio-Objects’: New Challenges at the Interface of Science, Technology and Society. Systems and Synthetic Biology 7: 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dow, Lukas E. 2015. Modelling Disease In Vivo With CRISPR/Cas9. Trends in Molecular Medicine 21: 609–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gasiunas, Giedrius, and Virginijus Siksnys. 2013. RNA-Dependent DNA Endonuclease Cas9 of the CRISPR System: Holy Grail of Genome Editing? Trends in Microbiology 21: 562–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • German Ethics Council. 2017. Germline Intervention in the Human Embryo: German Ethics Council Calls for Global Political Debate and International Regulation. http://www.ethikrat.org/files/recommendation-germline-intervention-in-the-human-embryo.pdf. Accessed 30 September 2017.

  • Gross, Michael. 2015. Bacterial Scissors to Edit Human Embryos? Current Biology 25: R439–R447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gyngell, Christopher, et al. 2017. The Ethics of Germline Gene Editing. Journal of Applied Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurlbut, J. Benjamin. 2015. Limits of Responsibility: Genome Editing, Asilomar, and the Politics of Deliberation. Hastings Center Report. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyun, Insoo, and Catherine Osborn. 2017. Query the Merits of Embryo Editing for Reproductive Research Now. Nature Biotechnology 35: 1023–1025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishii, Tetsuya. 2014. Potential Impact of Human Mitochondrial Replacement on Global Policy Regarding Germline Gene Modification. Reproductive Biomedicine 29: 150–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joerden, Jan C., Eric Hilgendorf, and Felix Thiele. 2013. Menschenwürde und Medizin. Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanphier, Edward. 2015. Don’t Edit the Human Germ Line. Nature 519: 410–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledford, Heidi. 2015. CRISPR, the Disruptor. Nature 522: 20–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, Puping, et al. 2015. CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Gene Editing in Human Tripronuclear Zygotes. Protein & Cell 6: 363–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Zhen, et al. 2018. Cloning of Macaque Monkeys by Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. Cell 172: 881–887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Hong, et al. 2017. Correction of a Pathogenic Gene Mutation in Human Embryos. Nature 548: 413–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musunuru, Kiran. 2017. Genome Editing: The Recent History and Perspective in Cardiovascular Diseases. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 70: 2808–2821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature Editorial. 2017. Humans 2.0. Nature Biotechnology 35: 993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2016. Genome Editing: An Ethical Review. http://nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/Genome-editing-an-ethical-review.pdf. Accessed 30 September 2017.

  • Ormond, Kelly E., et al. 2017. Human Germline Genome Editing. The American Journal of Human Genetics 101: 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, Ted. 2014. Playing God? Genetic Determinism and Human Freedom. New York/London: Routlegde.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothhaar, Markus. 2015. Die Menschenwürde als Prinzip des Rechts: Eine rechtsphilosophische Rekonstruktion. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schickl, Hannah, et al. 2014. Rechtsethische und rechtspolitische Herausforderungen im Umgang mit induzierten pluripotenten Stammzellen. Medizinrecht 32: 857–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stier, Marco, and Bettina Schoene-Seifert. 2013. The Argument from Potentiality in the Embryo Protection Debate: Finally “Depotentialized”? American Journal of Bioethics 13: 19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Academy of Medical Sciences, et al. 2015. Genome Editing in Human Cells – Initial Joint Statement. http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Policy/Spotlight-issues/Genome-editing/WTP059704.htm. Accessed 30 September 2016.

  • The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Human Genome Editing. Science, Ethics and Governance. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität, Erlangen, Germany

    Matthias Braun & Peter Dabrock

  2. Interdisciplinary Research Group Gene Technology Report, Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Berlin, Germany

    Hannah Schickl

Authors
  1. Matthias Braun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hannah Schickl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Dabrock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Braun .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität , Erlangen, Germany

    Matthias Braun

  2. Interdisciplinary Research Group “Gene Technology Report”, Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Berlin, Bayern, Germany

    Hannah Schickl

  3. Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität, Erlangen, Germany

    Peter Dabrock

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Braun, M., Schickl, H., Dabrock, P. (2018). Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty. In: Braun, M., Schickl, H., Dabrock, P. (eds) Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty. Technikzukünfte, Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft / Futures of Technology, Science and Society. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22660-2_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation