-
Conclusion
- Indiana University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Conclusion 14 Orwellian scenes of government surveillance. Drastic curtailment of reproductive liberty. Class warfare. Covert action against other nations. Monstrous creatures asserting supremacy over other human species. Is this vision of the future inescapable? We surely hope not. And just possibly, hope will be enough. All of this may turn out to be an overinflated science fiction story, a child’s nightmare. Genetic enhancements may never be developed. If they are, they might not work. If they do, society somehow might learn to accommodate them without major dislocation. If you listen to some genetic scientists, you will hear a lot of this talk. Let’s hope they’re right. But there is a subtext beneath some of their comments dismissing genetic enhancement that suggests a disturbing reason why their views might be somewhat skewed. In an article in the leading journal Science, for example, Jon W. Gordon rejects the prospects for genetic enhancement, stating at one point: 198 Wondergenes Given the inherent limitations of the gene transfer approach to enhancement, discussion of extending such procedures to humans is scientifically unjustified. We clearly do not yet understand how to accomplish controlled genetic modification of even simple phenotypes . Where more complex traits such as intelligence are concerned , we have no idea what to do, and in fact we may never be able to use gene transfer for enhancement of such phenotypes.1 He then proceeds to ask: “If we accept the notion that genetic enhancement is not practicable in the near future, what policies should we develop concerning the use of such technology?” After explaining why attempting gene transfers for enhancement purposes would be unethical, he concludes with the following caution : Finally, and perhaps most important, broad legal restrictions incur the risk of limiting invaluable research. . . . If, as a society, we feel compelled to make a statement against genetic enhancement, we need not enact anticipatory legislation. Instead we can evaluate such manipulations as we would any other invasive clinical procedure . . . [and] we will currently reject the procedure on all counts as medically unethical. Fear of genetic manipulation may encourage proposals to limit basic investigations that might ultimately lead to effective human gene transfer. History has shown that effort is far better spent in preparing society to cope with scientific advances than in attempting to restrict basic research. Gene transfer studies may never lead to successful genetic enhancement, but they are certain to provide new treatment and prevention strategies for a variety of devastating diseases. In short, Gordon is worried that, as a result of fears over the threat of genetic enhancement, NIH funding for basic genetic research will be cut off and other restrictions might be added.The question is whether these fears lead him and other scientists to overstate the technical difficulties and understate the true potential when they downplay the prospects for genetic enhancement. When they say that genetic enhancement will not be a reality in the foreseeable future, are they being straightforward, or are they primarily protecting their grants? [3.238.195.81] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 14:26 GMT) 199 Conclusion The fact is that we don’t know. And the real danger is that we may not know until it is too late to do anything about it. Our predicament is worsened by the fact that the actions we would have to take to reduce the threats from genetic enhancement are extremely unpalatable. No one wants to impose a Gattacalike testing regime. No one wants to interfere with reproductive freedom without a very good reason. Restrictions on genetic research cannot be undertaken lightly. It will be very costly to regulate genetic enhancement in a sufficiently fine-tuned fashion that we obtain societal benefits with a minimum of risk to the foundations of democracy. In the meantime, other priorities preoccupy us: The war on terror, racism, the economy. Almost certainly, we will not implement the necessary measures to deal with the threat of genetic enhancement until we have incontrovertible evidence that they are warranted. We will wait to close the barn doors until we see the horses running. And we will hope we are in time. Fortunately, some of the steps that must be taken do not have to be taken right away. There is no reason to establish a licensing program until more genetic enhancements become available. A lottery is not yet necessary, since there are still few enhancements that only the wealthy can purchase. But some steps...