The phenomenon of genetically modified humans is already the reality in modern society, enabled by the emergence of technologies to modify reproductive cells and embryos that bear a genetic ancestry. However, such enormous scientific progress promotes the framework for questions concerning the legislative perspective and its recognition of this technological change. Enríquez examines the legal side of human genome editing based on germline genome editing (GGE) in terms of administrative and constitutional law, where he defines the principal limits for a right to conduct GGE. They include:
- therapeutic uses to remedy disease,
- prophylactic purposes,
- cosmetic or enhancement purposes,
- uses involving modification of traits that raise concerns of discrimination already prohibited by the law.
The strong arguments against genes intervention involve critical and unquantifiable safety issues. Manipulation of human genes refers to the particular genetic modifications connected with traits, such as height, musculature, hair and eye color, intellectual ability, and athletic ability. Every person has two chromosomes with genetic coding for hemoglobin. The united effects of many genes determine traits, including eye color. The diagnosis of sickle cell (SCD) trait emerges when a person has one gene for the common adult hemoglobin (A), and another for hemoglobin S. Specific genome-editing tools are currently used to cure SCD by enhancing fetal hemoglobin production. The process of editing human genes encompasses critical ethical norms since it affects the next generation without their approval. Therefore, by having the capacity to profoundly modify the next populace and the lack of full-analyzed implications, it is important to consider the manipulation of the genes under the legislative and policy regulations.