Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

This paper examines whether there are moral differences between the mitochondrial replacement techniques that have been recently developed in order to help women afflicted by mitochondrial DNA diseases to have genetically related children absent such conditions: maternal spindle transfer (MST) and pronuclear transfer (PNT). Firstly, it examines whether there is a moral difference between MST and PNT in terms of the divide between somatic interventions and germline interventions. Secondly, it considers whether PNT and MST are morally distinct under a therapy/creation optic. Finally, it investigates whether there is a moral difference between MST and PNT from a human embryo destruction point of view. I conclude, contra recent arguments, that regarding the first two points there is no moral differences between PNT and MST; and that regarding the third one MST is morally preferable to PNT, but only if we hold a gradualist account of the moral value of human embryos where zygotes have slight moral value.

Original publication

DOI

10.1007/s11019-017-9772-3

Type

Journal article

Journal

Medicine, health care, and philosophy

Publication Date

12/2017

Volume

20

Pages

503 - 511

Addresses

Centre of Medical Law and Ethics, The Dickson Poon School of Law, King's College London, Strand, London, WC2R 2LS, UK. cesar.pg@kcl.ac.uk.

Keywords

Humans, Mitochondrial Diseases, Zygote Intrafallopian Transfer, Morals, Ethical Analysis, Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy