CGS-authored
You wouldn't know it from the charged partisan debate here in the United States, but throughout the world new policies on human genetic and reproductive technologies reflect a surprising degree of consensus. In Europe, Australia, Canada and elsewhere, national policies on cloning, stem cells, infertility research and related topics are similar in spirit and share key provisions:
They explicitly affirm technologies that have a real chance of preventing or curing disease.
They ban technologies that could harm children or open the door to new forms of high-tech commercial eugenics.
They ensure that any research involving human embryos is tightly regulated.
They establish publicly accountable means to review policies and make new ones.
They pose no risks for reproductive rights. (The new Canadian law, for example, was supported by feminists and women's health leaders.)
Sounds pretty straightforward, doesn't it? In the United States, however, anything remotely having to do with reproduction or embryos is viewed through the polarized framework of abortion politics. Policies that might be interpreted as setting a legal precedent or giving a symbolic edge to one side or...