Cargando…

Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective

Jürgen Habermas is regarded as a central bioconservative commentator in the debate on the ethics of human prenatal genetic manipulations. While his main work on this topic, The Future of Human Nature, has been widely examined in regard to his position on prenatal genetic enhancement, his arguments r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Palacios‐González, César
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5949862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27973714
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12307
_version_ 1783322791150354432
author Palacios‐González, César
author_facet Palacios‐González, César
author_sort Palacios‐González, César
collection PubMed
description Jürgen Habermas is regarded as a central bioconservative commentator in the debate on the ethics of human prenatal genetic manipulations. While his main work on this topic, The Future of Human Nature, has been widely examined in regard to his position on prenatal genetic enhancement, his arguments regarding prenatal genetic therapeutic interventions have for the most part been overlooked. In this work I do two things. First, I present the three necessary conditions that Habermas establishes for a prenatal genetic manipulation to be regarded as morally permissible. Second, I examine if mitochondrial replacement techniques meet these necessary conditions. I investigate, specifically, the moral permissibility of employing pronuclear transfer and maternal spindle transfer. I conclude that, according to a Habermasian perspective on prenatal genetic manipulation, maternal spindle transfer (without using a preselected sperm and egg) and pronuclear transfer are morally impermissible. Maternal spindle transfer is, in principle, morally permissible, but only when we have beforehand preselected a sperm and an egg for our reproductive purpose. These findings are relevant for bioconservatives, both for those who hold a Habermasian stance and for those who hold something akin to a Habermasian stance, because they answer the question: what should bioconservatives do regarding mitochondrial replacement techniques? In fact, the answer to this question does not only normatively prescribe what bioconservatives should do in terms of their personal morality, but it also points towards what kind of legislation regulating mitochondrial replacement techniques they should aim at.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5949862
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59498622018-05-18 Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective Palacios‐González, César Bioethics Special Issue Papers Jürgen Habermas is regarded as a central bioconservative commentator in the debate on the ethics of human prenatal genetic manipulations. While his main work on this topic, The Future of Human Nature, has been widely examined in regard to his position on prenatal genetic enhancement, his arguments regarding prenatal genetic therapeutic interventions have for the most part been overlooked. In this work I do two things. First, I present the three necessary conditions that Habermas establishes for a prenatal genetic manipulation to be regarded as morally permissible. Second, I examine if mitochondrial replacement techniques meet these necessary conditions. I investigate, specifically, the moral permissibility of employing pronuclear transfer and maternal spindle transfer. I conclude that, according to a Habermasian perspective on prenatal genetic manipulation, maternal spindle transfer (without using a preselected sperm and egg) and pronuclear transfer are morally impermissible. Maternal spindle transfer is, in principle, morally permissible, but only when we have beforehand preselected a sperm and an egg for our reproductive purpose. These findings are relevant for bioconservatives, both for those who hold a Habermasian stance and for those who hold something akin to a Habermasian stance, because they answer the question: what should bioconservatives do regarding mitochondrial replacement techniques? In fact, the answer to this question does not only normatively prescribe what bioconservatives should do in terms of their personal morality, but it also points towards what kind of legislation regulating mitochondrial replacement techniques they should aim at. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-12-14 2017-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5949862/ /pubmed/27973714 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12307 Text en © 2017 The Authors Bioethics Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Special Issue Papers
Palacios‐González, César
Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective
title Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective
title_full Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective
title_fullStr Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective
title_full_unstemmed Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective
title_short Ethics of Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: A Habermasian Perspective
title_sort ethics of mitochondrial replacement techniques: a habermasian perspective
topic Special Issue Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5949862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27973714
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12307
work_keys_str_mv AT palaciosgonzalezcesar ethicsofmitochondrialreplacementtechniquesahabermasianperspective