ABSTRACT The expansion of biotechnology's frontiers include in vitro gametogenesis (IVG), which allows the generation of gametes from pluripotent stem cells. By analyzing discourses from two IVG companies – Conception and Ivy Natal – the authors examine the framing of IVG as a continuation of normalized IVF practices and a revolutionary reproductive technology. The paper suggests that IVG proponents engage in “ontological choreography” to integrate their technology into existing accepted reproductive frameworks while simultaneously mobilizing liberatory arguments emphasizing reproductive autonomy, expanded reproductive access, and genetic kinship. The authors highlight tensions in how IVG is temporally framed within idealized futures of expanded reproductive access. The paper also examines a workshop organized by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine in 2023, illustrating how commercial actors selectively engage with ethical arguments in ways that narrow the complexity of issues at stake. The authors conclude with the need for enhanced public deliberation regarding IVG's trajectory.

ABSTRACT This paper assesses stakeholder perspectives on ethical issues in the private sector genomics industry; specifically, it examines perspectives from executives of genomics companies, using qualitative group interviews. As part of the third round of a larger Delphi study, private sector leaders were asked to provide their views on issues related to diversity (in both the genomics workforce and amongst genomics study participants), data privacy and governance laws, and benefit-sharing, in addition to the industry’s role (or lack thereof) in addressing these challenges. Our findings show 1) general consensus that industry should be a primary driver of privacy innovation amidst a difficult landscape for aligning government-based privacy regulations, 2) linking of diversity to privacy issues in the industry, and 3) a tendency to ascribe responsibility for change to actors other than those within private sector companies.

Since the birth of gene-edited babies in China in 2018, public debates about Human Germline Genome Editing (HGGE) have re-ignited. Based on a literature review, legal analysis, and our involvement in a consortium project aimed at fostering public deliberation on HGGE, this article offers a reflection on how debates around this technology are evolving. We argue that they tend to be subject to discursive narrowing, a form of framing that reduces the space for open moral deliberation, promotes the desirability of HGGE and depoliticizes the issue. We explain this discursive narrowing through the philosophical theory of technomoral change, which unravels the reciprocal influence of technology and morality. We conclude by showing that—exactly because of this reciprocal influence—a repoliticization of the discussion on HGGE is needed and propose some recommendations concerning how the discursive narrowing of societal and scientific debates on this technology can be undone.

ABSTRACT The commercial ecosystem of direct-to-consumer genome analyses (DTC) has begun to influence police investigations. As commercial services increasingly sell genomic information to law enforcement agencies this article investigates a key issue of this trend: what commercial dynamics tie DTC genome services and policing together, and how does that impact law enforcement? Based on netnographic empirical material the article makes several contributions. First, it describes general trends that characterize the cooperations between law enforcement and DTC genome services. Second, it gives an overview of data collected by the companies and distinct approaches to cooperation with law enforcement. Third, based on the above several developments are discussed that become more entrenched in law enforcement: the dynamics of data accumulation, sharing policies as marketing strategies, and the rise of genetic surveillance capitalism. In conclusion, the article emphasizes the need for more detailed regulation, societal education and scientific reflection.

Contemporary scientific research depends on sharing resources. Norms, cultures and infrastructures enable, incentivize or require sharing in particular ways. Commons are one type of infrastructure, and their key characteristics include the provision and governance of resources. Understanding how resources become part of a commons is critical for implementing arrangements that effectively facilitate scientific research. This article uses commons theory associated with knowledge resources to explore efforts to establish a registry for the Australian stem cell research community where registration is not a current norm. Analyzing the perspectives of stem cell researchers regarding registries, we make two contributions: (1) a conceptual contribution to the commons literature by explicating a more contingent understanding of resources, and (2) an empirical analysis of a relatively under-examined form of governance arrangement (i.e. registries). We emphasize paying close attention to the context-dependent processes through which resources are viewed as common-able and may subsequently become common-ed.