The arrival of precision genetic editing techniques like CRISPR has made correcting damaged or undesirable genes a real possibility.

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics (NCB) said letting parents use new gene-editing technology to pick characteristics of their unborn child can be “morally acceptable” as long as it doesn’t increase social inequalities, an influential medical ethics group has said.

The aim could go from preventing diseases to produce the smarter and stronger individual, as long as it meets strict ethical and regulatory tests.

At this moment, UK does not allow to edit DNA except for research. People with genetic diseases could suffer from becoming even more discriminated by their unusualness. The safety of this method is still to be tested, and it is yet to know which gene affect which disease.

It could have no moral objection as long as long as it follow simple rules according to the group of expert. The first one is to gene-edit only if it benefit the health and welfare of the future individual. The second one is to not create more inequalities, when some scientist are afraid that these new technologies will be accessible only for the richest.

At this moment, using CRISPR as a “molecular scissor” still cause unexpected DNA modification, although it does edit the targeted gene. A protest coming from “Don’t Screen Us Out” says that this a form of eugenics that need do get more attention than it actually does. But this method could cure genetic diseases like Down’s syndrome that was healed in 90% of the experiments, and this lead to a call for more debates.

But for Fiona Watt, executive chair of the UK Medical Research Council, this research area needs to improve its safety and its feasibility, even if she knows it is already rigorously monitored, because gene edits are transmitted to new generations.

To conclude, Professor Leach Scully says we have this chance to have time to debate before it becomes an actual concern, and we should take it.