Article
Bratton, Mark (ed), God, Ethics and the Human Genome: Theological, Legal and Scientific Perspectives (commission earned) (Church House Publishing, 2009).
Following the rediscovery in 1900 of the work of Gregor Mendel (1822-84), there was massive progress in the 20th Century on the cellular, molecular and informational nature of heredity, notably the elucidation of DNA. The culmination of this convergence of chemistry, biology and information sciences was the launch in 1990 of the Human Genome Project (HGP) to:
- Determine the totality of genetic information for the human species
- Understand the molecular bases of genetically related diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer's and cystic fibrosis
- Develop individual treatment (pharmacogenetics)
- Formulate prevention strategies.
The Genome, or DNA cell, is a 3 billion sequence and there are 23-25,000 of these in a human body; 90% of our DNA is identical with chimpanzees; 70% with bananas; 30% with yeast.
Almost immediately, sequences of genetic code were patented so that they could be patented and marketed commercial in monopoly situations.
The project raises seven key themes:
- What does it mean to 'play God"?
- What is "Naturalness"?
- How far is the technology determinist and reductionist?
- How do the human, animal and plant relate?
- Is patenting commodification?
- How does genetics affect solidarity?
- What about medical therapies and social justice.
Genetic screening:
- Can reveal the condition of a person not being tested
- Who owns the information?
- Sibling data can be used to convict suspects
Religious implications:
- Jesus healed as a holistic act, not simply curing
- Cure can become idolatry
- The abandonment of creatureliness
- Nature cannot be owned
- Overall, the test is whether we are changed so as not to be in the image of God.
Ethics and philosophy:
- Blood, organs and body parts already sold
- A long tradition on private property that it is nature plus labour
- The HGP should be owned by all and none
- Possible errors do not justify doing nothing.
Moral evaluation:
- Is it beneficial? - sometimes
- Is it "playing God" - no more than other procedures
- Does it interfere with nature? - yes but only moderately
- Does it make fundamental changes? - potentially in use but not essence
Changing nature:
- No more radical than selective plant breeding
- Changing a gene to prevent cystic fibrosis different from changing a gene affecting offspring; the trade-off between autonomy and preventing harm
- Embryo selection already common
- A baby as a commodity: not just the blonde blue eyed intelligent baby; the deaf parents who wanted a deaf child
- Mutation plays a universal role which minimises genetic manipulation.
On choice:
- Patents may lead to commodification
- Naturalness is an idea outside culture and change, relating to creatureliness
- Reductionism, from the complex to the simple, dwarfs humanity
- In terms of social justice, clean water more important than HGP
- In the Imago Dei we live in solidarity in a creaturely struggle for health
Overall, the central problem is power and control, the objective of reducing humanity to a mathematical code.
KC/2011