When it comes to the potential medical miracles of genetic engineering, just because something might be scientifically possible, even potentially helpful, doesn’t mean it makes sense to pursue it from either a practical, ethical, or Christian perspective.

That is the core view Fr. Kevin FitzGerald, SJ offers regarding rapid modern advances in genetic engineering technology, a topic on which he is a nationally recognized expert. A Wisconsin Province Jesuit, Fr. FitzGerald has given presentations nationally and internationally and is often interviewed by the news media on topics such as human genetic engineering, cloning, stem cell research, and the Human Genome Project.

A popular presentation he offers general audiences on these topics is a talk titled “A Catholic Perspective on Human Genetic Engineering.”He places an emphasis on the ‘A.’

“Mine is a Catholic perspective, not the Catholic perspective,” he cautions of his overall views – views that are rooted in a Jesuit tradition that calls on discernment and promotes a faith that does justice. Fr. FitzGerald questions a common presumption that millions of lives could be saved by gene therapy and other genetic engineering advances, and that these technological miracles will “trickle down” and become affordable to the general global populace. In questioning the presumption, he cites U.N. statistics regarding an older technology: an estimated 1.1 billion people live without access to clean water and 2.4 billion without sanitary sewerage treatment. About 2.2 million children worldwide die annually of diseases related to a lack of these basic services.

“How long have we had technology for adequate sanitation?” he asks rhetorically. “I think the Romans had it 2,000 years ago.”

Fr. FitzGerald does not long for a simpler scientific time. He does, however, question scientific approaches that hurtle forward without deliberating over larger outcomes. For example, artificial chromosomes are hailed as a potential therapy for enhanced human performance or as cures for a number of genetic diseases, but how they might be applied raises any number of questions.

“Imagine a teenager coming home in tears not because her friends have a new car or better toys, but because they have ‘Chromosome 5.0’ and she only has version 3.1,” Fr. FitzGerald says.

He notes that humans and chimpanzees are, genetically speaking, about 95% identical and presents a photo of a hybrid creature called a “geep” produced by combining a goat and a sheep embryo. The baby creature’s coat is a patchwork of wool, representing the sheep contribution of the animal, and hair, derived from the goat cells. The implied possibilities and questions raised about what is a human being and what can we do to humans raise any number of other questions regarding matters of ethical conduct and research.

Fr. FitzGerald also emphasizes that as humans, we are creatures loved by God, and he cautions against what he calls “the question of human reductionism,” in which humans are viewed simply for the value of their genes, cells, and brains.

Other ongoing issues include balancing the tension between pursuing all avenues of promising research with the protection of human subjects in research, and establishing value and protection in a pluralistic world for embryos, fetuses, the elderly, the environment, and other animals.

In a sense, the yellow flag approach that Fr. FitzGerald endorses regarding genetic engineering is one supported by another province Jesuit, Fr. John Staudenmaier, SJ, regarding technology in general. Staudenmaier is a historian of technology, University of Detroit Mercy professor, editor of Technology and Culture, and part of an emerging discipline that urges people to question technological advancements and their outcomes as other than predestined inevitabilities.

Fr. Kevin FitzGerald with students at Loyola University – Chicago, where he was assigned before going to Georgetown University in 2001.

When individuals view technological advancements as options, Staudenmaier says, they position themselves as freethinkers, capable of weighing the strengths and weaknesses of a particular discovery or breakthrough and balancing its benefits with its pitfalls. (Jesuit Journeys – Summer 1999) Or, as Fr. FitzGerald says, “Scientific good does not always equate with societal good…. Even if the research and subsequent medical treatments are done in an ethical, no-harm way, we’re still left with the question of who will have access?”

Moreover, he concludes, “As Catholics we have a faith and justice responsibility to serve the underserved and marginalized in all societies. That’s a value I’d hate to see lost in the discussion.”