The gene-environment interaction: Why genetic enhancement might never be distributed fairly
Sinead Prince1, Queensland University of Technology Brisbane 1Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Abstract
Ethical debates around genetic enhancement tend to include an argument that the technology will eventually be fairly accessible once available. That we can fairly distribute genetic enhancement has become a moral defence of genetic enhancement. Two distribution solutions are argued for, the first being equal distribution. Equality of access is generally believed to be the fairest and most just method of distribution. Second, equitable distribution: providing genetic enhancements to reduce social inequalities. In this presentation, I make two claims. I first argue that the very assumption that genetic enhancements can be distributed fairly is problematic when considering our understanding of gene-environment interactions e.g., epigenetics. I then argue that arguments that genetic enhancements are permissible because the intended benefits can be distributed fairly as intended are misinformed. My first claim rests on the assertion that genetic enhancements do not enhance traits in a vacuum; genes are dependent on conducive environments for expression. If society cannot guarantee fair environments, then any benefit conferred from being genetically enhanced will be undermined. Therefore, any argument that the distribution of genetic enhancements will be fair and that the technology is therefore morally permissible is mistaken.
Biography
Sinead is a PhD Candidate at the Queensland University of Technology within the Australian Centre for Health Law Research. Her PhD is on whether genetic enhancement will contribute to human well-being using philosophical theories of well-being. She co-hosts the podcast, “Learn Me Right” with fellow PhD candidate Ruthie Jeanneret where they interview experts in health law and bioethical issues to discuss evidence-based research in an accessible way.