Gene editing, extinction and ethics: Why open conversation is key
Gene editing, extinction and ethics: Why open conversation is key
Tags: Ethics, Gene editingGabriela Harrod, ASU News, 2025.
In a new paper published in Science, researchers are challenging one of conservation’s deepest assumptions — that extinction is always a failure to be avoided. With new genome-editing tools making it technically possible to eliminate entire species, the question is no longer just scientific, but ethical: When, if ever, should we consider driving a species extinct on purpose? The study, titled “Deliberate extinction by genome modification: An ethical challenge,” brought together ethicists, conservation biologists, ecologists and social scientists to explore this complex question. ASU School of Life Sciences Professor James Collins co-authored the piece, which argues that while extinction should never be taken lightly, there may be “extremely rare and compelling” cases where it is justified.
“This is a research area that is inherently counterintuitive,” Collins said. “At a time when biodiversity is more valued than ever, the idea that it could be ethically permissible to deliberately eradicate a species seems paradoxical. But we’re asking: Are there situations where it makes sense?” According to Gregory Kaebnick, a senior research scholar at The Hastings Center and the paper’s lead author, this conversation started over lunch during a National Academies meeting on gene drive research. Collins posed the idea that full extinction might mark an ethical line that genome-editing technologies shouldn’t cross. “The answer we offer in this new paper is, in effect, ‘almost, but not quite,’” Kaebnick said.
