> institutional pressures can be put on them to make them change their mind.

Which is a weird and arbitrary location to draw the line considering how those institutions tend to lean on other issues, or even the same issue in a slightly different context.

I wasn't trying to draw any line anywhere. It is notoriously hard to draw any lines when it comes to disabilities.

I'm saying it's a weird spot for them to draw a line.

If CRISPR enabled a way to achieve the same outcome while avoiding these concerns (to be clear, I have no idea whether this is a possibility), that would seem to be a desirable outcome from all points of view.

> Of course, the embryo cannot consent,

I mean, technically the person born with Down Syndrome would be incapable of consenting on their own life decisions after they were born, right?

While a D.S. sufferer has intellectual disability, its severity may vary a lot, with some cases mild enough that the capability of giving consent might be there.

Then there are mosaic cases, which are in the middle between a full Down Syndrome and normalcy. In mosaic cases, only a certain percentage of cells is afflicted. People with mosaic aneuploidies can often lead fairly normal lives.