Germline Editing Using CRISPR: Why a Moratorium Is Not the Solution (From the 2020 Schwab Family Law Essay Contest)

• Author: Daniel J. Malkin
• Pages: 69-86

69

Germline Editing Using CRISPR:

Why a Moratorium Is Not the Solution

DANIEL J. MALKIN*

Introduction

More than a decade ago, scientists discovered that bacteria have a

complex adaptive immune system with the ability to recognize and stave

off viral infections.1 A bacterium will snip off small pieces of DNA from

its viral attacker and use that DNA as a reference to recognize and ght

back against the same virus if it returns in the future.2 Scientists coined

the term CRISPR to refer to this family of reference DNA.3 When a virus

lingers or resurfaces, the bacterium uses the CRISPR sequences to guide

a scissor-like protein, Cas-9, to the virus’s complementary DNA where

1. See Rodolphe Barrangou et al., CRISPR Provides Acquired Resistance Against Viruses in

Prokaryotes, 315 science 1709 (2007).

2. See id.

3. See Ruud Jansen et al., Identication of Genes That Are Associated with DNA Repeats

in Prokaryotes, 43 Molecular MicroBiology 1565 (2002) (coining the term “CRISPR,” an

acronym for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats). The researchers who

conducted this investigation discovered and categorized these repetitive DNA or chemically

related RNA sequences but had not yet identied their role in the organism.

*Daniel J. Malkin is the second-place winner of the 2020 Howard C. Schwab Memorial

Essay Contest and an attorney practicing in intellectual property law. Daniel received his J.D.

from Pepperdine Caruso School of Law after earning his Ph.D. in Molecular Toxicology from

U.C.L.A. He thanks Professor Kristine Knaplund at Pepperdine for her encouragement and

mentorship and for her fascinating seminar course that inspired this Essay. He is also indebted

to the talented and hardworking editors of the Family Law Quarterly. Most of all, he is eternally

grateful for his loving and devoted family.

From the 2020 Schwab Family Law Essay Contest

Published in Family Law Quarterly, Volume 55, Number 1, 2021. © 2021 American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may

not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.

70 Family Law Quarterly, Volume 55, Number 1, 2021

Cas-9 will neutralize the virus by binding and shearing the viral DNA.4

Shortly after its discovery, scientists began exploiting CRISPR to identify,

cut, and, subsequently, edit human DNA at a target gene sequence with

unprecedented specicity.5 The technology can be used to repair DNA

mutations in adult somatic (nonreproductive) cells, or it can be used to

repair mutations in germline (reproductive) DNA.6

It is possible to modify human germline DNA by using CRISPR to

edit the DNA of a human sperm, egg, or single-cell embryo. When used

in conjunction with in vitro fertilization (IVF), gene-edited offspring are

possible. Unlike somatic cells, if germline DNA is modied, the resulting

genomic changes propagate to every cell of the body and to every cell

of that person’s future offspring. Citing ethical concerns, including

the permanent deleterious effects of potential errors in the germline

editing process, the United Nations Educational, Scientic and Cultural

Organization’s (UNESCO’s) International Bioethics Committee (IBC) in

2015 called for a global ban on editing the human germline.7 Nevertheless,

at least one scientist has since said that he used CRISPR for germline-

editing of children.8

Since the 1970s, the clinical application of IVF has generated many of

the same ethical misgivings generated by CRISPR technology regarding

its use for germline editing. In the U.S., IVF is extensively self-regulated

by professionals but only marginally regulated by federal and state

4. See Feng Zhang et al., CRISPR/Cas9 for Genome Editing: Progress, Implications and

Challenges, 23 hum. molecular geneTics R40 (2014); see also F. Ann Ran et al., Genome

Engineering Using the CRISPR-Cas9 System, 8 naTure proTocols 2281 (2013).

5. See Ran et al., supra note 4; see also Janice S. Chen et al., Enhanced Proofreading

Governs Crispr–Cas9 Targeting Accuracy, 550 naTure 407 (2017).

6. See Dianne Nicol et al., Key Challenges in Bringing CRISPR-Mediated Somatic Cell

Therapy into the Clinic, 9 genome meD. 85 (2017). Somatic cells are nonreproductive cells.

Alterations in these cells “can affect the individual, but they are not passed on to offspring.”

Somatic Cells, naT’l human genome rsch. insT. (NHGRI), https://www.genome.gov/

genetics-glossary/Somatic-Cells. Germline, or germ cells, are eggs and sperm that pass genes to

the next generation. Germ Line, NHGRI, https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/germ-line

(last visited Apr. 14, 2020).

7. u.n. eDuc., sci. & culTural org., inT’l BioeThics comm., reporT oF The iBc on

upDaTing iTs reFlecTion on The human genome anD human righTs 28 (2015) [hereinafter

2015 IBC reporT].

8. See Dennis Normile, CRISPR Bombshell: Chinese Researcher Claims to Have Created

Gene-Edited Twins, science (Nov. 26, 2018, 1:10 PM), https://www.sciencemag.org/

news/2018/11/crispr-bombshell-chinese-researcher-claims-have-created-gene-edited-twins;

Ken Moritugu, China Convicts 3 Researchers Involved in Gene-Edited Babies, AP news (Dec.

30, 2019), https://apnews.com/article/health-scientic-research-china-genetics-he-jiankui-7bf5

ad48696d24628e49254df504e3ee.

Published in Family Law Quarterly, Volume 55, Number 1, 2021. © 2021 American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may

not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.