A golden opportunity for South Africa to legislate on human heritable genome editing

被引:1
|
作者
Thaldar, D. W. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ KwaZulu Natal, Sch Law, Durban, South Africa
[2] Harvard Univ, Petrie Flom Ctr Hlth Law Policy Biotechnol & Bioet, Harvard Law Sch, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
关键词
artificial reproductive technology; equality; genome editing; quality of life; South Africa;
D O I
10.7196/SAJBL.2023.v16i3.1568
中图分类号
R-052 [医学伦理学];
学科分类号
0101 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background. South Africa (SA) currently has a golden opportunity to legislate on human heritable genome editing (HHGE), as the country is revising its assisted reproductive technology regulations. A set of sub-regulations that deals with HHGE, which could seamlessly slot into the current regulations, has already been developed. The principles underlying the proposed set of sub-regulations are as follows: HHGE should be regulated to improve the lives of the people and should not be banned; the well-established standard of safety and efficacy should be used in the regulation of HHGE; quality of life is what matters, and not preserving a 'normal' genome; parents' reproductive autonomy must be respected; and equality of access to approved HHGE technology should be promoted. Objectives. To ascertain whether the proposed set of sub-regulations that deals with HHGE is aligned with public opinion in SA, and SA's Bill of Rights.Methods. Public opinion in SA is determined with reference to a deliberative public engagement study on HHGE conducted among South Africans, and the relevant rights in the Bill of Rights are interpreted with reference to recent case law.Results. This proposed set of sub-regulations that deals with HHGE is aligned with public opinion in SA, and SA's Bill of Rights. Conclusion. Despite the legal and ethical complexities of HHGE, the proposed set of sub-regulations provides a targeted and effective legislative approach. They fit seamlessly into the country's existing health law framework, creating specific legal standards for HHGE that align with both public opinion and the country's Bill of Rights.
引用
收藏
页码:91 / 94
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Heritable human genome editing: correction, selection and treatment
    Scott, Rosamund
    [J]. MEDICAL LAW REVIEW, 2024, 32 (02)
  • [2] The Geneva Statement on Heritable Human Genome Editing: A Criticism
    de Miguel Beriain, Inigo
    [J]. TRENDS IN BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2021, 39 (03) : 219 - 220
  • [3] Procreative Non-Maleficence: A South African Human Rights Perspective on Heritable Human Genome Editing
    Thaldar, Donrich
    Shozi, Bonginkosi
    [J]. CRISPR JOURNAL, 2020, 3 (01): : 32 - 36
  • [4] Recent Developments in the Regulation of Heritable Human Genome Editing
    S. Soni
    [J]. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 2024, 21 : 15 - 18
  • [5] Heritable Human Genome Editing The International Commission Report
    Adashi, Eli Y.
    Cohen, I. Glenn
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2020, 324 (19): : 1941 - 1942
  • [6] Heritable Human Genome Editing: The Public Engagement Imperative
    Adashi, Eli Y.
    Burgess, Michael M.
    Burall, Simon
    Cohen, I. Glenn
    Fleck, Leonard M.
    Harris, John
    Holm, Soren
    Lafont, Cristina
    Moreno, Jonathan D.
    Neblo, Michael A.
    Niemeyer, Simon J.
    Rowe, Eugene J.
    Scheufele, Dietram A.
    Tetsa, Paul F.
    Vayena, Effy
    Watermeyer, Richard P.
    Fung, Archon
    [J]. CRISPR JOURNAL, 2020, 3 (06): : 434 - 439
  • [7] Recent Developments in the Regulation of Heritable Human Genome Editing
    Soni, S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOETHICAL INQUIRY, 2024, 21 (01) : 15 - 18
  • [8] MICROGRAPHICS IN REPUBLIC-OF-SOUTH-AFRICA - GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY
    BOTHA, HJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MICROGRAPHICS, 1977, 11 (02): : 129 - 132
  • [9] ISSCR guidelines fudge heritable human-genome editing
    Françoise Baylis
    [J]. Nature, 2021, 594 : 333 - 333
  • [10] Legal and Ethical Issues in the Report Heritable Human Genome Editing
    Cohen, Glenn
    Adashi, Eli Y.
    [J]. HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2021, 51 (03) : 8 - 12