There are a few ethical considerations that arise when discussing gene editing. One of the first ones that came to me was a socioeconomic disadvantage. Sure there is a want to advance and perfect this field to do things such as, get rid of diseases and disabilities. However, this is something that will remain incredibly expensive and only available to the wealthy. This creates an unfair health advantage and increases the gap in access to health care and a more prominent classist society. There also is a moral obligation when considering safety. These are human lives we are experimenting with and not just the life of the subject carrying the edited genes, but we must also consider the mother carrying this child. Is there a risk to her? Due to this, gene editing in its experimental phase is a slippery slope as the risk cannot be justified by the potential benefit. One other ethical consideration that comes to mind is where we draw the line between enhancements and therapeutic purposes. Which diseases do we target and prioritize? How do we come to that type of conclusion because now it’s a question of what type of suffering is deemed acceptable? How can we quantify suffering? I would bet the most difficult aspect of gene editing must be the moral and ethical conversations surrounding it, not the science that makes it possible.