Biopolitics

The Center for Genetics and Society uses the term “biopolitics” to refer to public understanding, public policies, and public-interest advocacy about the social meanings and consequences of human biotechnologies. Biopolitics recognizes the need for public and political engagement on consequential applications of biotechnologies, such as heritable genome editing. Biopolitical views are not always aligned with political positioning on other issues, especially in the U.S. Public interest advocates working in a biopolitical framework emphasize the importance of prioritizing social justice when evaluating technological innovations.


Biopolitical Times

Public and policy conversations about heritable human genome editing often leave the impression that rules governing it are few and far between. Many news reports and scholarly articles present global governance as starting from a more or less blank slate; some also suggest that global agreement on this controversial issue would be unlikely. This view skims over some inconvenient facts, like the existence of the Oviedo Convention, a binding international treaty signed by 29 European countries, which prohibits heritable...

Biopolitical Times

On September 3rd, Heritable Human Genome Editing was published. This Report was the work of a multinational Commission organized by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences and Medicine and the U.K. Royal Society. Its explicit conclusion, as described in the press release, is two-fold: first, that heritable genome editing is not yet safe or effective enough for human application; second, that the first clinical uses of it should be restricted to serious diseases caused by a single aberrant...

Aggregated News

In August 2017, scientists reported that they had used the gene-editing tool CRISPR–Cas9 to correct a mutation in viable human...

Aggregated News

To converse with Shobita Parthasarathy is to be enveloped in two kinds of warmth: that of a generous-spirited, energetic, and...

View a recording of the February 25, 2021 event sponsored by the San Francisco Asian Art Museum:

With film clips and discussion, this DEAI series workshop explores a dangerous idea that has threatened the American Dream from the beginning: the belief that some groups and individuals are inherently superior to others and more deserving of fundamental rights. View excerpts from the 2018 documentary “A Dangerous Idea,” which reveals how biologically determined politics has disenfranchised women and people of color and provided a rationale for state-sanctioned crimes committed against America’s most vulnerable citizens, and discuss the meaning, use, and misuse of gene science. With UC Berkeley bioethicist and Center for Genetics and Society senior fellow Osagie K. Obasogie, Marcy Darnovsky, executive director at the Center for Genetics and Society, and “A Dangerous Idea” filmmaker Stephanie Welch. Moderated by Milton Reynolds.

On January 29, 2020, Marcy Darnovsky spoke to an audience of 600 in Santa Barbara at TEDxLagunaBlanca. Her talk was titled, “Use Gene Editing to Treat Patients, Not Design Babies.”

Rosemarie Garland-Thompson discusses "Biomedical Ethics and the Existential Threat to Persons with Disabilities" at the Columbia Center for Clinical Medical Ethics at the Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center.

Bill McKibben and john a. powell came discuss the “Climate Crisis, Designer Babies, and Our Common Future.” The event was moderated by Osagie K. Obasogie, Professor of Bioethics at UC Berkeley.

Press Statement