Where Will We Draw the Line? Public Opinions of Human Gene Editing

Kirsten A. Riggan, Richard R Sharp, Megan Allyse

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The application of gene editing technologies to prevent or mitigate genetic disease in humans is considered one of its most promising applications. However, as the technology advances, it is imperative to understand the views of the broader public on how it should be used. We conducted focus groups to understand public views on the ethical permissibility and governance of gene editing technologies in humans. A total of 50 urban and semirural residents in the upper Midwest took part in six focus groups. Participants expressed multiple concerns about nonmedical uses of gene editing and its potential for unknown harms to human health, and were divided as to whether the individual patient or “medical experts” should be charged with overseeing the scope of its application. As potential stakeholders, the perspectives from the general public are critical to assess as genome editing technologies advance toward the clinic.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalQualitative Health Research
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Public Opinion
Technology
Focus Groups
Inborn Genetic Diseases
Gene Editing
Health

Keywords

  • ethics
  • genetics
  • health
  • moral perspectives
  • North America
  • qualitative research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Where Will We Draw the Line? Public Opinions of Human Gene Editing. / Riggan, Kirsten A.; Sharp, Richard R; Allyse, Megan.

In: Qualitative Health Research, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c60f3000b2ab4f70986c36bea02399fa,
title = "Where Will We Draw the Line? Public Opinions of Human Gene Editing",
abstract = "The application of gene editing technologies to prevent or mitigate genetic disease in humans is considered one of its most promising applications. However, as the technology advances, it is imperative to understand the views of the broader public on how it should be used. We conducted focus groups to understand public views on the ethical permissibility and governance of gene editing technologies in humans. A total of 50 urban and semirural residents in the upper Midwest took part in six focus groups. Participants expressed multiple concerns about nonmedical uses of gene editing and its potential for unknown harms to human health, and were divided as to whether the individual patient or “medical experts” should be charged with overseeing the scope of its application. As potential stakeholders, the perspectives from the general public are critical to assess as genome editing technologies advance toward the clinic.",
keywords = "ethics, genetics, health, moral perspectives, North America, qualitative research",
author = "Riggan, {Kirsten A.} and Sharp, {Richard R} and Megan Allyse",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1049732319846867",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Qualitative Health Research",
issn = "1049-7323",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Where Will We Draw the Line? Public Opinions of Human Gene Editing

AU - Riggan, Kirsten A.

AU - Sharp, Richard R

AU - Allyse, Megan

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The application of gene editing technologies to prevent or mitigate genetic disease in humans is considered one of its most promising applications. However, as the technology advances, it is imperative to understand the views of the broader public on how it should be used. We conducted focus groups to understand public views on the ethical permissibility and governance of gene editing technologies in humans. A total of 50 urban and semirural residents in the upper Midwest took part in six focus groups. Participants expressed multiple concerns about nonmedical uses of gene editing and its potential for unknown harms to human health, and were divided as to whether the individual patient or “medical experts” should be charged with overseeing the scope of its application. As potential stakeholders, the perspectives from the general public are critical to assess as genome editing technologies advance toward the clinic.

AB - The application of gene editing technologies to prevent or mitigate genetic disease in humans is considered one of its most promising applications. However, as the technology advances, it is imperative to understand the views of the broader public on how it should be used. We conducted focus groups to understand public views on the ethical permissibility and governance of gene editing technologies in humans. A total of 50 urban and semirural residents in the upper Midwest took part in six focus groups. Participants expressed multiple concerns about nonmedical uses of gene editing and its potential for unknown harms to human health, and were divided as to whether the individual patient or “medical experts” should be charged with overseeing the scope of its application. As potential stakeholders, the perspectives from the general public are critical to assess as genome editing technologies advance toward the clinic.

KW - ethics

KW - genetics

KW - health

KW - moral perspectives

KW - North America

KW - qualitative research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065298356&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85065298356&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1049732319846867

DO - 10.1177/1049732319846867

M3 - Article

C2 - 31057062

AN - SCOPUS:85065298356

JO - Qualitative Health Research

JF - Qualitative Health Research

SN - 1049-7323

ER -