Font size:
Print
South Africa Allows Genetic Editing in Children
Context:
South Africa has recently updated its health guidelines to permit research that could lead to genetically modified children, making it the first country to explicitly allow heritable human genome editing. This change is groundbreaking as most countries have strict restrictions or bans on this type of research due to ethical concerns.
New Guidelines on Genome Editing:
- In May 2024, South Africa added new rules in its health guidelines, allowing research that may result in children with modified genes.
- This decision marks a significant shift, as other nations hesitate to explore this path due to ethical questions and potential societal impacts.
Issues with Gender and “Designed” Traits:
- Allowing genetic modifications brings up challenging issues, such as the possibility of reinforcing gender biases or choosing certain physical traits.
- These practices could affect future generations’ perceptions of gender roles and potentially limit natural human diversity by “designing” specific characteristics.
Gender and Societal Impact of the Decision
The decision to allow heritable genome editing in South Africa brings up several profound ethical concerns around gender and societal impact, particularly regarding gender divide, foetus manifestation, and gendered manufacturing. Here’s what these terms mean and why they matter in the context of genome editing:
Gender Divide:
- The gender divide refers to the risk that genome editing could deepen existing gender biases by encouraging parents to select traits based on traditional gender stereotypes.
- This might lead to pressures to “design” children to fit narrow ideas of masculinity or femininity, limiting the diversity in how people can express gender. Such choices could reinforce outdated social roles and expectations around gender.
Foetus Manifestation:
- Foetus manifestation is the potential to control specific traits in a child before they are born. This raises ethical questions about autonomy, as children would have traits decided for them without their say.
- It may also lead society to view children according to specific “designed” characteristics, which could impact their personal identity and individuality.
Gendered Manufacturing:
- Gendered manufacturing refers to the risk of using genome editing to deliberately “manufacture” gender traits, such as strength or sensitivity, based on societal expectations.
- This could create pressures to design children to fit certain gender roles, potentially reinforcing stereotypes. Over time, this may lead to social imbalances if certain traits become more valued or desired, limiting gender diversity.
Controversial History of Gene Editing:
- In 2018, a Chinese scientist claimed to have created the world’s first gene-edited babies, reportedly to make them resistant to HIV.
- This announcement caused an international backlash, as the research was conducted in secret and lacked public discussion.
- Many experts argued that editing human embryos should only occur with clear societal agreement, especially when alternative ways to prevent genetic diseases already exist.
Ethical Concerns Around Genome Editing:South Africa’s new guidelines allow heritable genome editing but require it to meet specific criteria:
- Medical Need: The modification should have a clear medical purpose.
- Transparency and Informed Consent: Participants must fully understand and agree to the research.
- Ethical Oversight: Independent ethical bodies should monitor the research.
- Ongoing Ethical Evaluation: The research must be reviewed continuously for ethical implications.
- Safety and Efficacy: There should be strong evidence that it is safe and effective.
- Long-term Monitoring: The effects must be tracked over time.
- Legal Compliance: The research must follow national laws.
Legal Conflicts and the Collingridge Dilemma:
- Though the guidelines permit genome editing, South Africa’s National Health Act of 2004 prohibits genetic manipulation of embryos.
- This conflict between new guidelines and existing law highlights the Collingridge Dilemma — the challenge of controlling emerging technologies when their impacts are still uncertain and may be irreversible.
Future Implications and “Scientific Tourism”:
- The new guidelines could pave the way for disease treatments, like those targeting sickle cell disease.
- However, these rules also open the door to edits that affect future generations, raising concerns about “scientific tourism” — where researchers from other countries might come to South Africa to conduct studies they can’t do at home.
