How much does ethics even matter in this specific case? If they develop this technology and use it in a "maximally ethical" way, whatever that is, what is stopping the next person to get their hands on it from using it unethically? It seems to me that the ethics question was "Should we have this technology at all?" and not "What do we do with it?" and it's already been answered.
“We do not take the development of this technology lightly. Our hope is that it will one day be used to bring healthy kids into the world, so we must hold ourselves to very high safety and ethical standards. Our plan will be to work closely with scientific, regulatory and ethical experts to ensure this technology develops safely and responsibly.”
I don’t understand. Are you saying there’s some negative impact to allowing people to have children who otherwise couldn’t? What problems do you foresee?
Obviously, but this is not so different from "regular" IVF for example. I'd have liked a little bit more explanation from GP about why these particular means go too far for them whereas current fertility treatments don't, instead of just throwing a blanket suggestion of unethicalness out there.
How much does ethics even matter in this specific case? If they develop this technology and use it in a "maximally ethical" way, whatever that is, what is stopping the next person to get their hands on it from using it unethically? It seems to me that the ethics question was "Should we have this technology at all?" and not "What do we do with it?" and it's already been answered.
I agree with you completely - I was just trying to make the point that they claim to care about ethics and yet have no ethicists from what it appears.
Let me help you out with my automated bioethics bot.
val bioethics = function(proposal) { return "That's unethical"; }
My current level of cynicisms says that if you make someone a gatekeeper, they will use that power.
At minimum, to justify their salary.
“We do not take the development of this technology lightly. Our hope is that it will one day be used to bring healthy kids into the world, so we must hold ourselves to very high safety and ethical standards. Our plan will be to work closely with scientific, regulatory and ethical experts to ensure this technology develops safely and responsibly.”
From their homepage
> Our Mission
> We want to help parents have kids when it otherwise wouldn’t be possible.
What is so unethical about that?
Sure, that end is noble, but the ends don't always justify the means.
I don’t understand. Are you saying there’s some negative impact to allowing people to have children who otherwise couldn’t? What problems do you foresee?
9 replies →
Obviously, but this is not so different from "regular" IVF for example. I'd have liked a little bit more explanation from GP about why these particular means go too far for them whereas current fertility treatments don't, instead of just throwing a blanket suggestion of unethicalness out there.
Because the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I can see many ways this spirals into something different.
Having Ethicists making these decisions is paving another road with good intentions.