Taking responsibility, making irresponsibility: Controversies in human gene editing

Area of Science:

• Bioethics
• Sociology of Science

Background:

• Human germline editing is frequently labeled 'irresponsible' in scientific and public discourse.
• International summits in 2015 and 2018, alongside He Jiankui's 2018 announcement of gene-edited babies, intensified these discussions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze how 'irresponsible' research emerges from specific qualifications and demarcations.
• To examine the process of 'irresponsibilization' in scientific research.
• To explore the political, institutional, and practical ramifications of labeling research as irresponsible.

Main Methods:

• Qualitative analysis of discourse surrounding international summits on human gene editing.
• Case study analysis of the He Jiankui controversy.
• Examination of how responsibility and irresponsibility are constructed in scientific debates.

Main Results:

• The label 'irresponsible' arises from scrutinizing research soundness, legality, safety, and ethical stances.
• The process of 'irresponsibilization' singles out individuals and questions their actions.
• This controversy highlighted the need for containment of irresponsible research and verification of knowledge claims.

Conclusions:

• The concept of 'irresponsible' research is actively constructed and carries significant political and institutional weight.
• The 'irresponsibilization' of research necessitates institutional action and clear decision-making frameworks.
• Understanding these dynamics is crucial for navigating future advancements in human gene editing.