Genetic harm: bitten by the body that keeps you?

... We must attempt to explain, how, if ever, our existence may harm us. To address this and the other questions raised, I propose to examine what constitutes harm and whether it makes sense to say that our genetic makeup may harm us. To do this I will describe three approaches to the problem of describing the status of negative effects our genes have upon us, which I have named the "technical harm" view, the "constitutive" view, and the "harmful conditions" view. On the technical harm view, the standard definitions of harm are applied to genetic disposition in an attempt to couch genetic defects or flaws in terms of harming. The constitutive view rejects applying the concept of harm to genetic disposition on the grounds that it is impossible to separate genetic disposition from individual identity. Lastly, the harmful conditions view, which I conclude is the most successful of the three, focuses on the tendency of certain genetic dispositions to cause harm in the future and thus avoids what I will argue are the "context" shortcomings of the other two approaches. To conclude the discussion I will very briefly analyze the ramifications of a harmful conditions view for the concept of genetic disease and the prospects for genetic counseling, gene therapy, and reproductive decision making.