|
CHRISTIAN
PRINCIPLES FOR GENETIC INTERVENTIONS
Introduction
Most of the new developments in genetics are the result of increased
knowledge concerning the fundamental structure of genes, not only
in humans but throughout all the realms of life on earth. Among
these developments are genetic mapping, new means for genetic testing,
new possibilities for genetic engineering, and a variety of eugenic
strategies that would have been unimaginable only a few years ago.
In short, new genetic knowledge has produced unprecedented power.
With that power has come the potential for immense good or harm.
And with such great power also comes great responsibility. From
the standpoint of the Christian faith, we are accountable for the
use of this power not only to global humanity, but also to every
realm of created life that God has entrusted to our stewardship.
Ultimately we are accountable to the Maker of the universe who holds
us responsible for the care of each other and of the earth.
When creation
came forth from the Creator's hand it was "very good."
(Gen. 1:31) The genetic endowment which Adam and Eve received from
their Creator was without defects. The genetic diseases from which
humans now suffer are not the result of normal variation. They have
developed through harmful mutation. In restoring the human genome
to a healthier condition, modern sciences may attempt to recover
more of creation's original condition. To the extent that helpful
genetic interventions can be conducted in harmony with Christian
principles, they are to be welcomed as cooperation with the divine
intention of alleviating the painful results of sin.
Any attempt
to state comprehensive principles of ethics for genetic interventions
must confront the complexities of a rapidly changing field of science.
Since the discovery of the molecular structure of DNA (deoxyribonucleic
acid), knowledge of genetics across an ever wider range of life
forms has burgeoned.
Many of the
increases in information and technological ability have been accompanied
by significant ethical concerns. We can only begin to imagine future
questions that will arise as genetic science progresses. The complexity
of the issues and the pace of change make it likely that statements
of relevant Christian principles will require expansion and modification
as time passes.
One example
of an area of rapid change is genetic mapping. An international,
scientific effort known as the Human Genome Project is attempting
to construct a detailed genetic chart, or "map," of all
the human chromosomes. The goal is to provide a comprehensive description
of the sequence of the millions of DNA base pairs which human chromosomes
contain. Researchers plan to use this information to facilitate
the identification and isolation of human genes, thereby providing
a helpful aid in understanding human development and in treating
human diseases. New details about the identity, role, and function
of human genes are continually emerging.
Increased
knowledge about the identity of human genes has given rise to a
variety of new possibilities for genetic testing. In the past, genetic
information about an individual was largely inferred from the person's
family history or clinical observations of the person's phenotype,
or physical expressions of a person's genes. Today, a growing number
of sophisticated genetic analyses make it possible to identify defective
genes that cause genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis, Huntington's
Chorea, and some types of cancer. Many of these tests can now be
performed prenatally. The potential exists for identifying hundreds
of genetic characteristics, including a wide range of genetic disorders.
A further
result of basic genetic knowledge is the capacity to alter genes
intentionally, or genetic engineering. Through the use of enzymes
which are able to excise specific segments of genes, it is possible
to change the genetic makeup of cells by deliberately inserting,
removing, or changing specific genes. Genetic engineering presents
astonishing new possibilities, including the transfer of genes across
biological boundaries, such as from animals to plants. The potential
for improving life forms seems endless. Genetically engineered plants,
for example, can be made more productive, more resistant to diseases,
or less susceptible to internal processes of decay.
Genetic engineering
has directly benefited human medicine. It has made possible, for
example, the production of human insulin and human growth factor,
neither of which was previously obtainable in sufficient quantities.
Genetic engineering also makes it possible to treat diseases through
genetic alteration. With this type of treatment, a patient whose
cells have missing or defective genes receives needed genetic material.
No one knows how many genetic diseases may eventually be treated
in this way, but initial successes with diseases such as cystic
fibrosis give hope that other genetic disorders may be treatable.
Increased
genetic knowledge also produces new possibilities for eugenics,
or endeavors to improve the gene pool of various species, including
human beings. In broad terms, such attempts fall into two categories.
Negative eugenics uses strategies whose goal is to prevent harmful
genes from being inherited. Positive eugenics uses strategies whose
goal is to promote the transmission of desirable genes. An example
of negative eugenics, common in the past, is the sterilization of
individuals considered to have defective genes capable of being
inherited. An example of positive eugenics is artificial insemination
by donors who have been selected for traits, such as high intelligence,
that are deemed desirable.
Ethical
Concerns
In order to provide focus, it is helpful to consider a sampling
of current ethical concerns for which we seek to state Christian
principles. These concerns can be placed in four basic categories:
the sanctity of human life, the protection of human dignity, the
acceptance of social responsibilities, and the safekeeping of God's
creation.
Sanctity
of human life. If genetic determinism reduces the meaning of
humanhood to the mechanistic outworkings of molecular biology, there
is serious potential for devaluing human life. For example, new
capacities for prenatal genetic testing, including the examination
of human pre-embryos prior to implantation, generate questions about
the value of human life when it is genetically defective. How serious
must a genetic defect, prenatally diagnosed, be before it is an
ethically legitimate reason for discarding a pre-embryo or for inducing
an abortion? Some conditions, such as trisomy 18, are generally
deemed incompatible with life. But the relative seriousness of most
genetic defects is a matter of judgment.
Protection
of human dignity. The protection of personal privacy and confidentiality
is one of the major concerns associated with the new possibilities
for genetic testing. Knowledge about a person's genetic profile
could be of significant value to potential employers, insurance
companies, and to those related to the person. Whether genetic testing
should be voluntary or mandatory, when and by whom the testing should
be done, how much and with whom the resulting information should
be shared are matters of significant ethical concern. Difficult
decisions must be made about whether there are exceptions to the
usual expectation of confidentiality and privacy when persons may
suffer considerable harm because of a lack of information. At stake
is the protection of persons from stigma and unfair discrimination
on the basis of their genetic makeup.
Another cluster
of concerns related to human dignity stems from the possibility
of intentionally altering the human gene pool. Medical interventions
for genetic diseases may be aimed either at the treatment of bodily
cells that are genetically defective or at the alteration of reproductive
cells. Changes in human reproductive cells could become a permanent
part of the human gene pool. Interventions may also extend beyond
the treatment of disease and include attempts to enhance what have
formerly been considered normal human characteristics. What are
the implications for the meaning of being human, for example, if
interventions aimed at enhancing human intelligence or physique
become available?
Acceptance
of social responsibilities. The power that results from new
genetic knowledge also raises concerns about the ethics of social
policies and the boundaries between individual liberties and social
responsibilities. For example, should society develop policies designed
to encourage either positive or negative eugenics? Should individuals
with serious genetic disorders be given full procreative liberty?
Another area of social concern has to do with the use of society's
resources. Questions can be raised about the amount of social resources
that should be spent for interventions in human genetics when more
basic health care is not fully available. Other questions arise
concerning the distribution of the benefits and burdens of genetic
interventions and how they will be shared by rich and poor within
society.
Stewardship
of God's creation. As the powers of genetic engineering are
further developed, many changes could be made in various species
that inhabit the earth. These changes have the potential for being
both permanent and, to some degree, unpredictable. What limits to
genetic change, if any, should be accepted? Are there boundaries
that should not be crossed in transferring genes from one life form
to another? We may hope that genetic changes are intended to enhance
life on our planet.
But there are reasons for concern. For example, consideration has
already been given to genetic alterations for the purpose of developing
new biological weapons. The exploitation of other life forms for
purposes of military security or economic gain should call forth
careful, moral scrutiny.
It is with
ethical concerns like these in mind that we state the following
Christian principles for genetic interventions.
Principles
1. Confidentiality. Christian love requires that
trust be maintained in human relationships. The protection of confidentiality
is essential to such trust. In order to safeguard personal privacy
and protect against unfair discrimination, information about a person's
genetic constitution should be kept confidential unless the person
elects to share the knowledge with others. In cases where others
may suffer serious and avoidable harm without genetic information
about another person, there is a moral obligation to share the needed
information (Matt. 7:12, Phil. 2:4).
2. Truthfulness.
The Christian obligation to be truthful requires that the results
of genetic testing be honestly reported to the person tested or
to responsible family members if the person is incapable of understanding
the information (Eph. 4:25).
3. Honoring
God's image. In all of God's creation, only human beings were
created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26, 27). The Christian acknowledgment
of God's wisdom and power in creation should lead to caution in
attempts to alter permanently the human gene pool (Gen. 1:31). Given
current knowledge, genetic interventions in humans should be limited
to treatment of individuals with genetic disorders (somatic cell
therapies) and should not include attempts to change human reproductive
cells (germ cell alterations) that could affect the image of God
in future generations. All interventions in human beings for genetic
reasons should be taken with great moral caution and with appropriate
protection of human life at all stages of its development (with
reference to selective abortion, refer to the principles stated
in "Seventh-day Adventist Guidelines on Abortion").
4. Prevention
of suffering. It is a Christian responsibility to prevent or
relieve suffering whenever possible (Acts 10:38, Luke 9:2). For
this reason the primary purpose of human genetic intervention should
be the treatment or prevention of disease and the alleviation of
pain and suffering. Because of the tendencies of sinful human nature,
the possibility of abuse, and unknown biological risks, attempts
to modify physical or mental characteristics with genetic interventions
for healthy persons who are free of genetic disorders should be
approached with great caution.
5. Freedom
of choice. God values human freedom and rejects the way of coercion.
People who are capable of making their own decisions should be free
to decide whether or not to be tested genetically. They should also
be free to decide how to act on information that results from testing,
except when others may suffer serious and avoidable harm. It may
be the morally responsible choice to avoid known risks of serious
congenital defects by forgoing procreation. While such decisions
about procreation and genetic testing are deeply personal, they
should be made by the individual with due consideration for the
common good.
6. Stewardship
of creation. Safeguarding God's creation includes esteem for
the diversity and ecological balance of the natural world with its
countless species of living creatures (Gen. 1). Genetic interventions
with plants and animals should show respect for the rich variety
of life forms. Exploitations and manipulations that would destroy
natural balance or degrade God's created world should be prohibited.
7. Nonviolence.
Using genetic manipulation to develop means of warfare is a direct
affront to Christian values of peace and life. It is morally unacceptable
to abuse God's creation by changing life forms into weapons of destruction
(Rev. 11:18).
8. Fairness.
God loves all human beings, regardless of their perceived social
status (Acts 10:34). The benefits of genetic research should be
accessible to people in need without unfair discrimination.
9. Human
dignity. Created in God's image, human beings are more than
the sum of their genes (Gen. 1:27, Acts 17:28). Human dignity should
not be reduced to genetic mechanisms. People should be treated with
dignity and respect for their individual qualities, and not be stereotyped
on the basis of their genetic heritage.
10. Healthfulness.
Christians have a responsibility to maintain the health of their
bodies, including their genetic health (1 Cor. 10:31). This means
that Christians should avoid that which is likely to be genetically
destructive to themselves or to their children, such as drug abuse
and excessive radiation.
Glossary
Base pairs. Pairs of complementary bases forming
the DNA structure; the units used to measure the length of DNA.
Base pairs consist of adenine (A), which must always pair with thymine
(T), and guanine (G), which must always pair with cytosine (C).
Chromosome.
The condensed rod made up of a linear thread of DNA interwoven with
protein that is the gene-bearing structure of living cells. Human
beings have twenty-three pairs of chromosomes.
DNA
(deoxyribonucleic acid). The double helix molecule that encodes
genetic information and is the primary hereditary molecule in most
species.
Enzyme.
A protein that facilitates a specific chemical reaction without
changing its direction or nature.
Eugenics.
Strategies for attempting to improve the gene pool of a species
either by halting the transmission of unwanted characteristics or
increasing the transmission of desired characteristics.
Gene.
The basic unity of heredity; a section of DNA that contains information
for the production of specific protein molecules.
Gene mapping.
The process of ascertaining the genetic sequence of a species.
Gene therapy.
The medical replacement or repair of defective genes in living cells.
Genetic
engineering. The process of altering the genetic makeup of cells
or individual organisms by deliberately inserting, removing, or
changing specific genes.
Genetic
testing. The examination of individuals' genetic makeup for
the purpose of identifying possible hereditary traits, including
defects or abnormalities.
Germ cell.
Reproductive cell.
Genome.
All of the genetic material in the chromosomes of a particular organism
or individual.
Genotype.
An individual's genetic makeup.
Human Genome
Project. The international, scientific effort to construct a
detailed map of human genes, identifying their structure and function.
Implantation.
The attachment of an embryo to the wall of the uterus.
Mutation.
A permanent alteration of DNA that can be inherited.
Negative
eugenics. Strategies for preventing the transmission of genetic
traits which are deemed undesirable.
Phenotype.
The observable characteristics resulting from a particular genotype
as influenced by environmental factors.
Positive
eugenics. Strategies for promoting the transmission of genetic
traits which are deemed desirable.
Pre-embryo.
A fertilized ovum (or conceptus) prior to implantation and the beginning
of pregnancy.
Recombinant
DNA. A novel sequence of DNA that is artificially produced by
joining segments of DNA.
Somatic
cell. Any cell of a body other than reproductive cells.
This document was adopted by the Christian View
of Human Life Committee in March 1995 and voted by the General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists Administrative Committee (ADCOM), June
13, 1995.
|