The use of human embryos in genome editing research has recently been approved in China and the United Kingdom. In Japan, the debate on regulations on genome editing research studies using human embryos is underway, but is becoming increasingly entangled, to the point of deadlock. One main reason for this is the misalignment between the Japanese government and the research communities, in their awareness surrounding these regulations. In this article, we report on this ongoing and entangled debate in Japan concerning the regulations on genome editing technology using human embryos. The most critically needed next step is a grassroots level discussion among various experts such as those in the arts and humanities.

This article engages with the frequently made claim that the UK has a transparent, accountable and strict but permissive regulatory approach to research using pre-implantation human embryos created in vitro and that this approach provides reassurance to the public in a particularly emotive area, has the full confidence of the scientific and medical research communities, and gives the UK a competitive advantage in the international field of stem cell research. Aborted fetuses are another controversial source of stem cells although their use is less widely known. The paper uses Jasanoff’s conceptual tool of framing to analyse the history of the legislative and governance arrangements for the collection of aborted fetuses for use in stem cell research and therapies in Britain. We argue that the arrangements are confused, lack transparency, are out of line with current good practice on seeking consent, and that non-compliance with regulations is condoned. Furthermore, in our view, the separation of legal and governance arrangements for collection and use of pre-implantation human embryos and aborted fetuses will increasingly become problematic, and we conclude by proposing that there is increasingly a potential for conflict between them.