Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Gene editing: Heed disability views

CRISPR–Cas9 is a gene-editing tool of great potential, although not necessarily from a disability-rights perspective (see D. J. H. Mathews et al. Nature 527, 159–161; 2015). People with disabilities are, in my view, unlikely to be queuing up for genetic modification: their priority is to combat discrimination and prejudice.

To 'fix' a genetic variation that causes a rare disease may seem an obvious act of beneficence. But such intervention assumes that there is robust consensus about the boundaries between normal variation and disability. Contrary to the prevailing assumption, most people with disabilities report a quality of life that is equivalent to that of non-disabled people (G. L. Albrecht and P. J. Devlieger Soc. Sci. Med. 48, 977–988; 1999).

The UK Nuffield Council on Bioethics is deliberating the ethical and social dimensions of CRISPR. International guidelines are urgently needed (Nature 526, 310–311; 2015), and the voices of people living with illness and impairment need to be heard.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tom Shakespeare.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shakespeare, T. Gene editing: Heed disability views. Nature 527, 446 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/527446a

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing