Search

This article undertakes an analysis of Australia's laws affecting human germline genome editing (HGGE). It draws on research from various ethical frameworks to analyse the values underpinning existing policy and which could underpin future approaches on HGGE. The article emphasises the importance of protecting egalitarianism, mitigating inequality risks, and ensuring stigmas around people with genetic conditions targeted by HGGE are not perpetuated. Doing so makes the philosophical case for a policy allowing HGGE for research use and considers the potential for limited clinical uses as we advance. The article recommends law reform in Australia in the form of an ongoing legislative review every three years, with the first review considering research and informed consent. The second considers appropriate clinical uses based on medical risk and what is agreed upon to be a list of considerations of a severe enough disease to be treated by HGGE. It gives examples of what the reform might look like, pending public engagement methodologies advocated. Finally, this article recommends considering ancillary legal issues raised by HGGE, including antidiscrimination and potential protections from liability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The CRISPR-cas9 genome editing system (CRISPR) has been used to make precise and heritable changes to a diverse range of animals. The use of CRISPR to edit embryonic cells initially raised widespread criticism and calls for an international ban. However, the rapid development of genome editing has prompted governments around the world to review the regulatory frameworks that oversee genetic technologies. In Australia, the Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction Act 2002 (Cth) and the Research Involving Human Embryos Act 2002 (Cth) expressly regulate the use of genome editing in early human embryos. This article analyses how these two Acts regulate research involving CRISPR and the implications of this for research practices in Australia. We argue that, given the current regulatory uncertainty around the legality of genome editing research in Australia, legislative reform is needed and propose reforms to provide greater clarity in this area.