Purpose of Assignment

​

The purpose of this essay was to examine a controversial or politically or publicly debated women’s health, obstetric or neonatal issue and present both sides equally. In my essay, I examined the ethics of genome editing and how it will impact the evolution of our society moving forward. There are many proponents of the technology as well as those who are opposed to it.

​

Student Approach to Assignment

 

The topic of genome editing is a controversial one but this essay sought to accurately represent the views of those on both sides of the argument. The CRISPR/cas system was first discovered in 1987 as a way to ‘cut’ out sequences of DNA within an organism. Specifically, the use of CRISPR has been a topic of debate surrounding the prospect of editing an embryo’s genome within the first 14 days of development. There are impassioned and well-educated citizens on both sides of the debate over the implications of using CRISPR technology in the editing of genomes within a human embryo. The advantages of exploring the technology could include: eliminating genetic diseases from humanity; benefiting present and future generations with healthier and more fulfilling lives; and controlling the use of the technology so as to prohibiting its use for the purposes of eugenics, discriminatory, or military purposes. Opponents of the technology posit that the disadvantages would include: risking the unintended effects on the embryo and the child due to off-target DNA alterations; causing discrimination, injustice, or disadvantage to certain individuals; and that this technology would discourage people from adopting although adoption is more viable alternative.

 

I chose this topic because nurses in the fields of obstetrics, neonatalogy, NICU as well as other many other fields could be directly impacted by this technology.  As professionals, we must be aware of this controversy as well as many other controversies and ethical dilemmas that we may face throughout our careers. This essay provided me with the opportunity to thoroughly research a topic and better understand the positions of most people who passionately care about this issue.

 

Reason for Inclusion of this Assignment

 

This assignment deserved to be included in my portfolio because it showcased my ability to represent both sides of the argument without offering my own opinion on the issue. I did extensive research in order to support or object to those on both sides of the argument. Furthermore, this essay supports some of the required core behaviors of the School of Nursing.

 

Teaching

• Uses information technologies and other appropriate methods to enhance one's own knowledge base

  • Before preparing to write this essay, I had not idea what the theories behind or ethical issues surrounding genome editing really included. I had heard the term "designer babies" before but was not sure if these babies had yet been born or if they were instead an argument posited by opponents of the technology because of ethical concerns. After conducting extensive research into the topic and examining the most recent case of genome editing by Chinese scientist He Jiankui, I now understand that CRISPR/cas system was first discovered in 1987 as a way to ‘cut’ out sequences of DNA within an organism. Specifically, the use of CRISPR has been a topic of debate surrounding the prospect of editing an embryo’s genome within the first 14 days of development. After my research into this topic, I can understand both sides of the argument for or against using the CRISPR technology. While I am not sure of my own opinion surrounding this technology, I am now informed enough that I can dispel rumors about the technology, such as debunking the fact that "designer babies" have not yet been produced. Yes, this technology makes them an increasingly real possibility, but ethical committees still need to determine the ethics and legality of CRISPR, which will determine the acceptable use of the technology.  

​

Professionalism

• Advocates for professional standards of practice using organizational and political processes

  • Example: The debate over the ethics of editing the human genome exploded into the forefront of media attention over this past year because a Chinese scientist, He Jiankui, claimed to have edited the genes of two twin girls, born in October 2018, in order to make them resistant to the AIDS virus (Stein, 2018). These actions brought the concerns of opponents of the CRISPR technology to the forefront. There is no legal recourse for the actions of He Jiankui and the ethical position of doctors and researchers on this are largely incorporated into their individual practices and are not specified in terms of legal documentation. The Nuffield Council was convened in order to address many of the issues raised by the CRISPR technology. The Neuffield Council concluded that using technology to edit the human genome should “be intended to secure, and be consistent with, the welfare of a person who may be born as a consequence of interventions using genome edited cells [and] should be consistent with social justice and solidarity so that it should not be expected to increase disadvantage, discrimination, or division in society” (Neuffield Council on Bioethics, 2016, para 32-33).

​

Culture

• Maintains an awareness of global environmental factors that may influence the delivery of health care services

  • As previously discussed, the actions of He Jiankui ​are certainly considered unethical by most and certainly illegal in the country of China. However illegal, He Jiankui's foray into the use of the CRISPR technology, unchecked by ethical or legal committees, opens a much-anticipated debate about the advantages and disadvantages of using the CRISPR technology to edit the human genome. The CRISPR technology has the potential to eliminate the pain of suffering that is caused by conditions with a genetic link, and surely, the resolution of these conditions would be for the benefit of future generations. However, opponents of the CRISPR technology worry about the risk of the unintended effects on the embryo and future child due to off target DNA alterations. Furthermore, opponents of the implementation of CRISPR worry that the potential benefits and harms of genome editing might not be distributed equitably. Some people are worried that negative effects could cause discrimination, injustice or disadvantage to certain individuals or groups. When considering reproductive ramifications, only the wealthy would be able to afford the treatment. In summary, the implementation of the CRISPR technology could have miraculous or catastrophic effects on the human population and there is simply no way to know which without experimentation. Ethics and legal committees have a very daunting task in front of them as they seek to determine the morality of denying some people the cure to their genetically inherited diseases at the risk of endangering the evolution of humanity.