The right to genetic ignorance confirmed

One of the much debated issues around the evolving human genetics is the qu estion of the right to know versus the right not to know. The core question of this theme is whether an individual has the right to know about her own genetic constitution and further, does she also have the right to remain i n ignorance. Within liberal traditions it is usually held that people, if t hey so wish, have the right to all the knowledge available about themselves , This right is based on the value of autonomy or on the right of self-dete rmination, and if is sometimes partly justified as a countermeasure to the authorities' control over people. I do not wish to deny the right to geneti c knowledge (about oneself). I think that its existence is self-evident. Th e argument I want to put forth in this paper is that in liberal societies w e should acknowledge people's right to remain in ignorance as well, The onl y reason for not doing this would be that grave harm to others would follow if people were allowed to make these seemingly self-regarding decisions, A rguments presented against the right to ignorance are twofold, First there are those arguing against the right to ignorance on the grounds of harm to others, that is, philosophers who do not deny people's right to ignorance i n self-related matters but wish to state that genetic ignorance causes harm to others, and this is one of the most commonly accepted reason for restri cting people's freedom. The other line of argument flows from the Kantian v iew that not even merely self-regarding foolishness (in the eyes of others) should be allowed.