Abstract:Do we have a moral obligation to genetically cure embryos rather than selecting between them? Such an obligation would be an ethical argument for human germline gene editing (hGGE) to avoid the inheritance of genetic conditions instead of using pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). In this article, the intuition that we do have such a moral obligation is critically evaluated. The article first develops a theoretical framework for discussing the ethical questions of hGGE. This framework is based on an exploration of the phenomenology of the germline, from both biological and philosophical points of view. It interprets the germline as an embodied intergenerational relationship that carries meanings for the parents and for the children-to-be. It relates them to previous family generations, and to their own children. Hence, the germline is a phenomenologically much richer concept than just the line of cells that carry the inheritable genetic information. Against this background, selection is compared with editing and a key moral difference is identified: editing is in effect an act of co-constructing the genome, which necessarily assumes a wider range of responsibilities that include those parts that are left unedited. Introducing hGGE into societies would hence significantly affect and change the moral structure of the intergenerational relationships. Selective implantation, on the other hand (in the context of PGD), is based on a moral choice in favour of the embryo which is to be unaffected by a disease or disability that causes suffering, rather than selecting knowingly the affected one. The claim that hGGE is in the best interests of the child-to-be counterfactually assumes the presence of a patient who has an interest in being cured. The embryo (a potential future patient) is, however, brought into existence by the same act that is also the treatment. The future children who would result from treatment by hGGE may rather have an interest in not having been treated by hGGE, since it makes the intergenerational relationships more complicated and burdensome. The question 'Is hGGE justified, or even an obligation?' is answered with a No.

Moral parenthood: not gestational

The mutuality account of parenthood: a subjective approach to parent-child relationships

Procreative Obligations and the Directed Duty of Care

Procreating in an Overpopulated World: Role Moralities and a Climate Crisis

Whose (germ) line is it anyway? Reproductive technologies and kinship

Fatherlessness, sperm donors and 'so what?' parentage: arguing against the immorality of donor conception through 'world literature'

Thoughts on the ethics of gestational surrogacy: perspectives from religions, Western liberalism, and comparisons with adoption

Surrogacy and the significance of gestation: Implications for law and policy

Why Human Germline Editing is More Problematic than Selecting Between Embryos: Ethically Considering Intergenerational Relationships

Men, maternity and moral residue: negotiating the moral demands of the transition to first time fatherhood

Prisoners of progress or hostages to fortune?

Heidegger and parenthood: A theoretical and methodological shift from instrumental to ontological understanding

Relating to foetal persons: why women's Voices come first and last, but not alone in Abortion debates

Fertile Connections: Thinking across Assisted Reproductive Technologies and Parenting Culture Studies

Parental meta-emotion philosophy and the emotional life of families: Theoretical models and preliminary data.

More Co-parents, Fewer Children: Multiparenting and Sustainable Population

Children, Paternalism and the Development of Autonomy

Deconstructing social anthropology discourses in their support of surrogacy: The case of France

A critical view on using "life not worth living" in the bioethics of assisted reproduction

Moral Descriptors and the Assessment of Children

Reproductive technologies and the quality of offspring in Asia: reproductive pioneering and moral pragmatism?