Genetics and justice, non-ideal theory and the role of patents: The case of CRISPR-Cas9

1Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

There are ongoing concerns of social justice regarding inequalities in the distribution of access to potential genome editing technologies. Working within non-ideal theory, Colin Farrelly advances a justification for the use of patents to speed up the arrival of safe and effective interventions for all, including the socially disadvantaged. This chapter argues that such success is less assured when one considers the actual functioning of patents and the practical implications of the patent system in the context of biotechnological innovations. I suggest that non-ideal theoretical approaches risk reverting back to a form of ideal theory if they simply refer to such real-world constraints-e.g. patents-but do not critically assess and fully examine how such constraints manifest themselves in practice. I highlight some considerations that would be important in order to develop and foster a more robust non-ideal approach to justice in biotechnological developments.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Feeney, O. (2023). Genetics and justice, non-ideal theory and the role of patents: The case of CRISPR-Cas9. In Governing, Protecting, and Regulating the Future of Genome Editing: The Significance of ELSPI Perspectives (pp. 222–240). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004526136_012

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free