The application of gene-edition has long been a controversial issue. People advocating legitimizing gene-edition in embryos hold the belief that using this technique to treat diseases does more good than harm to the new generation. While helping families produce healthy babies seems to be legitimate and acceptable, the long-term impacts and underlying risks of the operation of gene-edition should never be underestimated.
The consequences brought by unsuccessful gene-edition is no doubt devastating. There are still countless uncertainties in the process of editing the genes of embryos, given that its investigation is not thorough enough at this stage due to a lack of experimental data. It is obviously not an excuse to carry out experiments on precious human lives. Once there are mistakes in the operation of genetic alteration, an abnormal foetus will be resulted, being born with various illnesses or disabilities owing to its mistakenly altered genes. This innocent person has to resort to continuing his life even through it is likely to be tough and troublesome, while his fate should not have been like this if he can be born naturally. If diseases causing the disability of the person to take care of himself are induced by the error in gene-editing, his parents are to be trapped by the enormous financial predicament due to medical expenses as well as the difficulties encountered when looking after the child, not to mention the guilty feeling to go along with them. Indisputably, before any genetic modification, the consent of the unborn foetus is not, and cannot be sought for. The embryos have no choice but to accept their fates, which are designed in laboratories. Is this ethical?
The intention to alter genes to eradicate diseases is not bad, but whether every person with this technique will make use of it with a good objective cannot be assured. With exhaustive research being completed and more mature skills developed, it cannot be ensured that gene-edition will only be applied in processes such as treating diseases and the increasing crop yield. There are possibilities that people may intentionally develop foetus with particular traits even if the embryos are not diseased, aiming to create a human with desired characteristics equipped and undesirable ones removed. This surely violates the rule of nature. Originally, everyone should be born naturally, processing unique qualities which distinguish one from another. However, if gene-edition is not deployed in the right uses, various ethical issues will arise, while the boundary for determining right uses from wrong uses is still blurred.
While applying genetic modification on the cure of diseases seems enticing, it is not a bed of roses. The health status of the gene-edited children has to be tracked from time to time to ensure the effectiveness of the gene alteration and to elicit the experimental results for further studies in the field. Medical follow-ups are likely to accompany them throughout their lifetime. Also, risks are present in different stages of life of the person. The lifestyle including eating habits may also be required to follow a particular standard. A heavy price has to be paid, which may not differ much, compared to one who is born naturally with a disease. This is worth a thought.
To sum up, the risks of gene-edition bring uncertainties to innocent lives while conclusions regarding ethical boundaries cannot be reached easily. There are in fact alternatives to genetic modification for couples wanting to have healthy babies. Before the advent of further information which proves the undeniable necessity and safety of gene-edition, reservations about its wider use should be held.