Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (4)
Document Type
- Article (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- Case (1)
- Ethics (1)
- Ethics committee (1)
- Ethikkomitee (1)
- Ethische Fallbesprechung (1)
- Fallbesprechung (1)
- Implementation (1)
- Implementierung (1)
- Medical humanities (1)
- Moral case (1)
Institute
- Fakultät für Gesundheitswissenschaften (4) (remove)
Genetic engineering has provided humans the ability to transform organisms by direct manipulation of genomes within a broad range of applications including agriculture (e.g., GM crops), and the pharmaceutical industry (e.g., insulin production). Developments within the last 10 years have produced new tools for genome editing (e.g., CRISPR/Cas9) that can achieve much greater precision than previous forms of genetic engineering. Moreover, these tools could offer the potential for interventions on humans and for both clinical and non-clinical purposes, resulting in a broad scope of applicability. However, their promising abilities and potential uses (including their applicability in humans for either somatic or heritable genome editing interventions) greatly increase their potential societal impacts and, as such, have brought an urgency to ethical and regulatory discussions about the application of such technology in our society. In this article, we explore different arguments (pragmatic, sociopolitical and categorical) that have been made in support of or in opposition to the new technologies of genome editing and their impact on the debate of the permissibility or otherwise of human heritable genome editing interventions in the future. For this purpose, reference is made to discussions on genetic engineering that have taken place in the field of bioethics since the 1980s. Our analysis shows that the dominance of categorical arguments has been reversed in favour of pragmatic arguments such as safety concerns. However, when it comes to involving the public in ethical discourse, we consider it crucial widening the debate beyond such pragmatic considerations. In this article, we explore some of the key categorical as well sociopolitical considerations raised by the potential uses of heritable genome editing interventions, as these considerations underline many of the societal concerns and values crucial for public engagement. We also highlight how pragmatic considerations, despite their increasing importance in the work of recent authoritative sources, are unlikely to be the result of progress on outstanding categorical issues, but rather reflect the limited progress on these aspects and/or pressures in regulating the use of the technology.
Jenseits der Klinik
(2021)
Unser Beitrag stellt ein interaktives Ethik-Konzept vor, das in Zusammenarbeit der BruderhausDiakonie Reutlingen und der Universität Tübingen entwickelt wurde, um den Eigenheiten und Bedarfen einer komplexen Organisationsstruktur gerecht zu werden, die mehrere Geschäftsfelder und Standorte unter sich vereint. Wir skizzieren die Grundzüge des interaktiven Nijmegener Modells, in dem die Kooperation eines auf Leitungsebene angesiedelten Komitees und situationsbezogener Fallbesprechungen ein fruchtbares Zusammenspiel zweier unverzichtbarer Reflexionsweisen bewirken soll („Top-Down“/„Bottom-Up“). Wir zeigen auf, welche Herausforderungen sich bei der Implementierung dieses Modells in die konkrete Aufbauorganisation der BruderhausDiakonie ergaben, und mit welchen konzeptionellen oder „implementationstechnischen“ Mitteln ihnen begegnet wurde. Im Zentrum steht dabei die Erweiterung des Nijmegener Modells um ein Verbindungselement, welches die Zusammenarbeit zwischen zentralem Ausschuss und dezentralen Fallbesprechungen koordiniert und das interaktive Moment des Modells erst ermöglicht.