The Holocaust and the racial hygiene doctrine that helped rationalize it still overshadow contemporary debates about using gene editing for disease prevention.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(1):E49-54. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.49.
Tina K. Sacks, PhD, Katie Savin, MSW, and Quenette L. Walton, PhD, LCSW
Would you question health decisions made by a 37-year old Black woman whose great-grandfather died in the US Public Health Service Syphilis Study at Tuskegee?
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(2):E183-188. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.183.
Felix Gonzalez-Torres' and Gregg Bordowitz’s works express their experiences of living through a pandemic and subsequent social change and draw out key human rights themes.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(9):E821-829. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.821.
Clinically and ethically relevant questions are related to patient safety, therapeutic efficacy, equitable access, and global governance over humanity’s genetic legacy.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1079-1088. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1079.
Gene editing reminds professionals and the public that this technology’s reach goes beyond treating somatic disease to germline consequences yet unknown.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1056-1058. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1056.