- The Oxford Handbook of Law, Regulation, and Technology
- List of Contributors
- Law, Regulation, and Technology: The Field, Frame, and Focal Questions
- Law, Liberty, and Technology
- Equality: Old Debates, New Technologies
- Liberal Democratic Regulation and Technological Advance
- The Common Good
- Law, Responsibility, and the Sciences of the Brain/Mind
- Human Dignity and the Ethics and Regulation of Technology
- Human Rights and Human Tissue: The Case of Sperm as Property
- Legal Evolution in Response to Technological Change
- Law and Technology in Civil Judicial Procedures
- Conflict of Laws and the Internet
- Technology and the American Constitution
- Contract Law and the Challenges of Computer Technology
- Criminal Law and the Evolving Technological Understanding of Behaviour
- Imagining Technology and Environmental Law
- From Improvement Towards Enhancement: A Regenesis of EU Environmental Law at the Dawn of the Anthropocene
- Parental Responsibility, Hyper-parenting, and the Role of Technology
- Human Rights and Information Technologies
- The CoExistence of Copyright and Patent Laws to Protect InnovationA Case Study of 3D Printing in UK and Australian Law
- Regulating Workplace Technology: Extending the Agenda
- Public International Law and the Regulation of Emerging Technologies
- Torts and Technology
- Tax Law and Technological Change
- New Technologies, Old Attitudes, and Legislative Rigidity
- Transcending the Myth of Law’s Stifling Technological Innovation: How Adaptive Drug Licensing Processes Are Maintaining Legitimate Regulatory Connections
Abstract and Keywords
Two genetic technologies capable of making heritable changes to the human genome have revived interest in, and in some quarters a very familiar panic concerning, so-called germline interventions. These technologies are most recently the use of CRISPR/Cas9 to edit genes in non-viable IVF zygotes and Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy (MRT). The possibility of using either of these techniques in humans has encountered the most violent hostility and suspicion. Here, we counter the stance of the US NIH and its supporters by showing that differing global moralities are free to exist unimpeded under international biolaw regimes, which do not in any way represent unified opinion against such technologies. Furthermore, we suggest a more rational approach to evaluating them through analysis of similar technologies which have caused past controversy.
John Harris is Sir David Alliance Professor of Bioethics at the Institute of Medicine, Law, and Bioethics, University of Manchester. In 2001 he was the first philosopher to have been elected a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences. He has been a member of the Human Genetics Commission since its foundation in 1999. The author or editor of fourteen books and over 150 papers, his recent books include Bioethics (Oxford University Press, 2001), A Companion to Genetics: Philosophy and the Genetic Revolution, co‐edited with Justine Burley (Blackwell, 2002), and On Cloning (Routledge, 2004).
David R. Lawrence, University of Manchester
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.