RT Article
T1 Does Gene Editing in the Wild Require Broad Public Deliberation?
JF The Hastings Center report
VO 51
SP 34
OP 41
A1 Kaebnick, Gregory E.
LA English
YR 2021
UL https://ixtheo.de/Record/1787217167
AB How strong is the argument for requiring public deliberation by very large publics—at national or even global levels—before moving forward with efforts to use gene editing on wild populations of plants or animals? Should there be a general moratorium on any such efforts until such broad public deliberation has been successfully carried out? This article works toward recommendations about the need for and general framing of broad public deliberation. It finds that broad public deliberation is highly desirable but not flatly necessary before moving forward with any local cases of gene editing in the wild. It also finds that broad public deliberation would be most helpful in generating very general guidance and is unlikely to be appropriate for specific cases. Broad public deliberation is most helpful for cases that involve higher levels of uncertainty and moral ambiguity, but separating out a distinct class of cases for deliberation is not yet possible.
K1 Bioethics
K1 de-extinction
K1 democratic deliberation
K1 gene drives
K1 gene editing
K1 public deliberation
DO 10.1002/hast.1318