Cloning Trojan Horses: Precautionary Regulation of Reproductive Technologies

TILT Law & Technology Working Paper No. 004/2007

Tilburg University Legal Studies Working Paper No. 005/2007

17 Pages Posted: 14 May 2015

Date Written: November 29, 2007

Abstract

This paper concerns the fundamental question whether we should allow human enhancement techniques in the pursuit of individual happiness and, more particularly, if the so-called 'precautionary principle' has a role to play in pointing us in the direction of answers to that question. On the basis of a case study focusing on modern reproductive technologies such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (pgd), the argument takes the form of a dual challenge to precautionary regulation of reproductive technologies.

First, based on a theoretical analysis of the precautionary principle, it will be argued that most justifications for precautionary regulation of reproductive technologies are tenuous at best. This conclusion is reached on the basis of a distinction between 'fact-finding' precaution, 'deliberative' precaution, and 'enabling' precaution.

Second, based on the normative assumption that employment of precaution in similar cases should at the very least give rise to similar impacts on regulatory tilt (i.e. towards permissiveness or rather towards restrictions), empirical evidence strongly suggests that the use of precaution is likely to give rise to the arbitrary exercise of regulatory powers.

Keywords: regulation, reproductive technologies, biotechnology, reproductive, technologies, precaution

JEL Classification: K10, K40

Suggested Citation

Somsen, Han, Cloning Trojan Horses: Precautionary Regulation of Reproductive Technologies (November 29, 2007). TILT Law & Technology Working Paper No. 004/2007, Tilburg University Legal Studies Working Paper No. 005/2007, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1053981 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1053981

Han Somsen (Contact Author)

Tilburg Law School ( email )

Tilburg, 5000 LE
Netherlands

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
124
Abstract Views
843
Rank
412,003
PlumX Metrics