Maybe I'm just heartless, but it feels like sentimentality is the main justification here, and for that reason I don't think it should be relevant to the titular question. Some might argue that sentiment is justification enough, but I don't think it's a good way to decide the overall ethics of editing genes through CRISPR. Sure, it tells us something about Ruthie and her parents, but then again they're accustomed to their lifestyle. The option of changing the status quo is different from providing people the option to avoid a difficult life. Ultimately, the question on whether or not you should edit your child's genes needs to be a subjective one (unless someone can make a case for compulsive gene editing for certain defects, which I can't imagine). As the article points out, many people don't consider their condition to be a disease. I feel like this falls under the purview of my previous paragraph, but the article also makes the point that diversity can enrich people's lives, and perhaps we would lose that enrichment if we edited out disabilities. It's almost impossible to measure the impact of diversity against the suffering people experience when diagnosed with a debilitating illness, however I find myself siding with those who would like to eliminate suffering, even if that suffering provides a social function. And that's their decision. Personally, I have genetic histories of heart disease, alcoholism, depression, schizophrenia, and a pastiche of other things that I'm not currently suffering from. If I could take a treatment to eliminate these traits from my bloodline, I would do it in a heartbeat so that none of my descendants would have to suffer the way some of my family members have....But now he thinks that would have been a mistake: doing so might have erased some of the things that make Ruthie special — her determination, for instance. Last season, when Ruthie had been the worst player on her basketball team, she had decided on her own to improve, and unbeknownst to her parents had been practising at every opportunity. Changing her disability, he suspects, “would have made us and her different in a way that we would have regretted”, he says. “That’s scary.”
Even among people who already have life-threatening conditions, many choose not to interfere with the way the genetic cards are dealt.