Almeida M, Ranisch R (2022) Beyond safety: mapping the ethical debate on heritable genome editing interventions. Human Social Sci Commun 9(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01147-y

Article  Google Scholar 

Andorno R, Baylis F, Darnovsky M, Dickenson D, Haker H, Hasson K, Lowthorp L, Annas GJ, Bourgain C, Drabiak K (2020) Geneva Statement on Heritable Human Genome Editing: The Need for Course Correction. Trends Biotechnol

Baltimore D, Baylis F, Berg P, Daley GQ, Doudna JA, Lander ES, Lovell-Badge R, Ossorio P, Pei D, Thrasher A (2015) On human gene editing: International summit statement. National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC

Google Scholar 

Baylis F (2017) Human germline genome editing and broad societal consensus. Nat Hum Behav 1(6):1–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0103

Article  Google Scholar 

Baylis F (2019) Altered inheritance: CRISPR and the ethics of human genome editing. Harvard University Press

Baylis F, Darnovsky M, Hasson K, Krahn TM (2020) Human germline and heritable genome editing: the global policy landscape. The CRISPR Journal 3(5):365–377

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Beers V, Britta C (2015) Is Europe ‘giving in to baby markets?’Reproductive tourism in Europe and the gradual erosion of existing legal limits to reproductive markets. Med Law Rev 23(1):103–134

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bennett JM, Bennett MJ (2004) Developing intercultural sensitivity: An integrative approach to global and domestic diversity. na

Burall S (2018) Rethink public engagement for gene editing. Nature 555(7697):438–439. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-03269-3

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chan S, Donovan PJ, Douglas T, Gyngell C, Harris J, Lovell-Badge R, Mathews DJH, Regenberg A, Group On Behalf of the Hinxton (2015) Genome editing technologies and human germline genetic modification: The Hinxton Group Consensus Statement. Am J Bioethics 15 (12): 42-47https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2015.1103814

Commissie Genetische Modificatie (COGEM), and Gezondheidsraad. 2017. Ingrijpen in het DNA van de mens, Morele en maatschappelijke implicaties van kiembaanmodificatie. COGEM (Bilthoven)

Council of Europe (1997) Explanatory Report to the Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Council of Europe

de Wert G, Pennings G, Clarke A, Eichenlaub-Ritter U, van El CG, Forzano F, Goddijn M, Heindryckx B, Howard HC, Radojkovic D, Rial-Sebbag E, Tarlatzis BC, Cornel MC (2018) Human germline gene editing: Recommendations of ESHG and ESHRE. Eur J Hum Genet 26(4):445–449. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-017-0076-0

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Dryzek JS, Nicol D, Niemeyer S, Pemberton S, Curato N, Bächtiger A, Batterham P, Bedsted B, Burall S, Burgess M (2020) Global citizen deliberation on genome editing. Science 369(6510):1435–1437

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Escobar O (2009) The dialogic turn: Dialogue for deliberation. In-Spire Journal of Law, Politics and Societies

Escobar O (2011) Public dialogue and deliberation: A communication perspective for public engagement practitioners. UK Beacons for Public Engagement, Edinburgh

Google Scholar 

Est V, Rinie JT, Kool L, Nijsingh N, Rerimassie V, Stemerding D (2016) Rules for the digital human park: Two paradigmatic cases of breeding and taming human beings: Human germline editing and persuasive technology. Bioethics Committees, Berlin

Google Scholar 

Greely HT (2019) How should science respond to CRISPR’d babies? Issues Sci Technol 35(3):32–37

Google Scholar 

Habermas J (2001) "From Kant's" Ideas" of pure reason to the" Idealizing" presuppositions of communicative action: Reflections on the detranscendentalized" Use of Reason." Pluralism and the pragmatic turn: The transformation of critical theory: 11–39

Houtman D, Geuverink W, Helmrich IRAR, Vijlbrief B, Cornel M, Riedijk S (2023) What if” should precede “whether” and “how” in the social conversation around human germline gene editing. J Commun Gen: 1–5

Houtman D, Vijlbrief B, Polak M, Pot J, Verhoef P, Cornel M, Riedijk S (2022) Changes in opinions about human germline gene editing as a result of the Dutch DNA-dialogue project. Eur J Human Gen 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-022-01114-w

Houtman D, Vijlbrief B, Riedijk S (2021) Experts in science communication: A shift from neutral encyclopedia to equal participant in dialogue. EMBO reports e52988

Humm C, Schrögel P, Leßmöllmann A (2020) Feeling left out: underserved audiences in science communication. Media Commun 8 (1): 164–176. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i1.2480

Hurlbut JB (2019) Human genome editing: ask whether, not how. Nature 565(7738):135–136

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Iltis AS, Hoover S, Matthews KRW (2021) Public and Stakeholder Engagement in Developing Human Heritable Genome Editing Policies: What Does it Mean and What Should it Mean? Front Politic Sci 3:730869. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2021.730869

Article  Google Scholar 

International Bioethics Committee (2015) Report of the IBC on updating its reflection on the Human Genome and Human Rights. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (Paris). https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000233258

Jasanoff S (2015) Future imperfect: Science, technology, and the imaginations of modernity. Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power 1–33

Jasanoff S, Benjamin Hurlbut J, Saha K (2015) CRISPR democracy: Gene editing and the need for inclusive deliberation. Issues Sci Technol 32(1):37

Google Scholar 

Jezierska K (2019) With habermas against habermas. Deliberation without consensus. J Deliber Democ 15 (1)

Kennedy EB, Jensen EA, Verbeke M (2018) Preaching to the scientifically converted: evaluating inclusivity in science festival audiences. Intl J Sci Educ, Part B 8(1):14–21

Article  Google Scholar 

Lander ES, Baylis F, Zhang F, Charpentier E, Berg P, Bourgain C, Friedrich B, Joung JK, Li J, Liu D, Naldini L, Nie JB, Qiu R, Schoene-Seifert B, Shao F, Terry S, Wei W, Winnacker EL (2019) Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing. Nature 567(7747):165–168. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00726-5

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Morrison M de Saille S (2019) CRISPR in context: towards a socially responsible debate on embryo editing. Palgrave Commun 5 (1)

Mouffe C (2013) Agonistics: Thinking the world politically. Verso Books

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2017) Human Genome Editing: Science, Ethics, and Governance. (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press). https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/24623/human-genome-editing-science-ethics-and-governance

National Academy of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and the Royal Society (2020). Heritable Human Genome Editing. (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press). https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/25665/heritable-human-genome-editing

Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2018. Genome Editing and Human Reproduction: social and ethical issues. (London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics). https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/25665/heritable-human-genome-editing

Ormond KE, Mortlock DP, Scholes DT, Bombard Y, Brody LC, Faucett WA, Nanibaa’A G, Hercher L, Isasi R, Middleton A (2017) Human germline genome editing. Am J Human Gen 101 (2): 167-176 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.012

Pandya RE (2012) A framework for engaging diverse communities in citizen science in the US. Front Ecol Environ 10(6):314–317

Article  Google Scholar 

Pellizzoni L (2001) The myth of the best argument: Power, deliberation and reason1. Br J Sociol 52(1):59–86

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Poort L, Van Beers B, Van Klink B (2016) Introduction: symbolic dimensions of biolaw. In Symbolic legislation theory and developments in biolaw, 1–15. Springer

Ribeiro B, Bengtsson L, Benneworth P, Bührer S, Castro-Martínez E, Hansen M, Jarmai K, Lindner R, Olmos-Peñuela J, Ott C (2018) Introducing the dilemma of societal alignment for inclusive and responsible research and innovation. J Respons Innov 5(3):316–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2018.1495033

Article  Google Scholar 

Roeser S, Pesch U (2016) An emotional deliberation approach to risk. Sci Technol Human Values 41(2):274–297

Article  Google Scholar 

Roeser S, Taebi B, Doorn N (2020) Geoengineering the climate and ethical challenges: What we can learn from moral emotions and art. Crit Rev Int Soc Pol Phil 23(5):641–658

Article  Google Scholar 

Scheufele DA, Krause NM, Freiling I, Brossard D (2021) What we know about effective public engagement on CRISPR and beyond. Proc Natl Acad Sci 118(22):e2004835117. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004835117

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Schneiderhan E, Khan S (2008) Reasons and inclusion: The foundation of deliberation. Sociol Theory 26(1):1–24

Article  Google Scholar 

Simis MJ, Madden H, Cacciatore MA, Yeo SK (2016) The lure of rationality: Why does the deficit model persist in science communication? Public Understand Sci 25 (4): 400–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516629749. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662516629749.

Sirianni C (2010) Investing in democracy: Engaging citizens in collaborative governance. Rowman & Littlefield

van Baalen S, Gouman J, Houtman D, Vijlbrief B, Riedijk S, Verhoef P (2021) The DNA-dialogue: a broad societal dialogue about Human Germline Genome Editing in the Netherlands. Accepted for publication, The CRISPR journal. https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2021.0057

Book  Google Scholar 

Van Beers BC (2020) Rewriting the human genome, rewriting human rights law? Human rights, human dignity, and human germline modification in the CRISPR era. J Law Biosci 7 (1): lsaa006

Van der Burg W, Brom F (2000) Legislation on ethical issues: towards an interactive paradigm. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 3: 57-75

van Doorn M (2023) Waarom we beter denken dan we denken. Amersfoort: Noordboek

Van Klink B, Van Beers B, Poort L (2016) Symbolic legislation theory and developments in biolaw. Springer

WHO Expert Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing. 2021. Human Genome Editing: recommendations. Health Ethics & Governance, World Health Organization (Geneva). https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240030381.