This article critiques the biopolitical impact of CRISPR on intersex identities, highlighting ethical implications for social work.
CRISPR-Cas9 is a gene-editing technology that enables precise modification of DNA and is increasingly applied across biomedical and reproductive contexts. This article critically examines its biopolitical implications, arguing that clinical applications risk entrenching binary sex norms and contributing to the marginalization of intersex identities. Building on critical intersex studies, feminist bioethics, queer theory, and disability justice, the analysis traces continuities with eugenic history while foregrounding the ethical and democratic stakes of genetic and reproductive technologies. Drawing on global policy comparisons, it contends that the regulation of sex through genetic science may align with broader efforts to discipline bodily diversity, with implications for autonomy and pluralism. At the same time, CRISPR represents a potential site of empowerment: when governed ethically and guided by intersex-led organizations, it can enable more democratic participation in science and policy. The article proposes an Anti-Eugenic Feminist Bioethics Framework for Social Work, emphasizing anti-eugenic policy advocacy, trauma-informed and inclusive practice, intersex-led governance, and education that integrates critical theory with scientific literacy. Defending intersex rights, it argues, is central to sustaining democratic principles of freedom, diversity, and open inquiry. Social workers, positioned at the intersection of health, ethics, and human rights, have a professional mandate to ensure that genetic innovation affirms human dignity rather than reinforcing normative conformity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Charles Panabaker (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: