Updates

Hello everyone! I’m back in your inboxes after an unplanned break due to a health issue I’ve been dealing with. I’ve had a serious iron deficiency for the past six months, which has had the annoying consequence of causing fatigue and an inability to concentrate, especially the past couple months. Unfortunately, these are symptoms that don’t pair well with blogging (or philosophy or running). I’ve had a couple iron infusions and I was in the hospital yesterday for some tests. The results aren’t exactly good news, but I have a better sense of what’s going on. I hope to get back to my usual schedule soon.

I have a couple other updates.

Bioethics Special Issue on MAID and Autonomy

I’m pleased to announce that I’m guest editing a special issue of Bioethics called “The Role of Autonomy in Assisted Dying”. When it comes to MAID, I’m most interested in the question of how much freedom individuals should have to make their own end-of-life decisions. I’ve argued that autonomy should have a bigger role, while others have argued the opposite. It will be great to collect some papers that look at the current debate. The deadline for proposals is February 1st, 2025. You can find more info here.

When Gene Editing Should be Mandatory

Thomas Liang and I wrote a commentary on a paper by Jeff McMahan and Julian Savulescu in the American Journal of Bioethics. They argue that gene editing is sometimes preferable over embryo selection, since gene editing is sometimes better for the person who develops from the edited embryo—e.g., when it prevents a serious genetic disorder—which isn’t true of embryo selection. McMahan and Savulescu’s paper primarily focuses on the arguments for this claim instead of the practical details, though they have a brief discussion of genetic counseling. 

Thomas and I agree with their arguments and further argue that gene editing should sometimes be mandatory. We argue that the following conditions must be met for mandatory editing to be ethical. First, the medical benefits of the gene editing treatment must conclusively outweigh the risks. Second, there should be broad agreement on the welfare effects of certain conditions. Third, we are strictly advocating for beneficent gene editing of the in vitro embryo before the implantation phase, not when the unedited embryo has already been implanted. Finally, gene editing should be mandatory, and in turn legally enforceable, assuming the parents are able to access and afford the treatment without significant difficulty.

Thomas really led this one. He reached out in the spring when he was in his first year as an undergraduate at Western University. I’ll be watching his career closely.