• Identify issues that are pertinent to the question of how genetic modification should be regulated
• Identify pertinent assertions that go beyond philosophy and should rest on experimental observations
• Identify pertinent observations that bear on these assertions -- research articles and the experiments therein
• Bear in mind that the final report is bound by the requirement that "[a]ll assertions in the recommendations will be supported by citations to published evidence. The subcommittee will not rely on mere assertions, even from experts.", you should view what you read through this lens. Recall also that evidence is observations, not mere assertions.

To accomplish these aims, you may have to go beyond the confines of the focus articles and monograph I've listed below. Citations within these resources are a good place to start. With that preparation, the meeting on March 19th should enable the subcommittee to combine insights and evidence on specific questions and chart a course aimed at producing a document that describes prospects in human germline modification and to propose regulations. Bring with you what you found regarding the points listed above. It is unreasonable to expect that the subcommittee would be able so early to judge the merits of different positions, but it should be able to identify issues that need to be pursued and research articles that would be useful in that endeavor. When the day of the meeting arrives, be ready to serve as the spokesperson for your chosen resource.

I advise that you decide as early as possible what resource below you will focus on and communicate your preference to the rest of the committee. The resource you choose will most likely point you to the subject on which you will write your section of the final report.

• Anderson KR and 21 others (2018).
  CRISPR off-target analysis in genetically engineered rats and mice.
  Nat Methods 15:512-514.
   
• Cox DBT, Platt RJ, Zhang F (2015).
  Therapeutic Genome Editing: Prospects and Challenges.
  Nat Med 21:121-131.
   
• Katz G, Pitts P (2017)
  Implications of CRISPR-Based Germline Engineering for Cancer Survivors
  Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science 51:672-682.
   
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2017)
  Human Genome Editing: Science, Ethics, and Governance.
  Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
          You might focuss on the sections concerning the tools of genome editing and genetic enhancement
   
• Withrock IC and 20 others (2015).
  Genetic diseases conferring resistance to noninfectious diseases.
  Genes Dis 2930:247-254.
          See also the news article on the Germline topic page

• Knoepfler P (2016)
  GMO Sapiens: The Life-Changing Science of Designer Babies (on reserve)
  World Scientific, New Jersey.
          A well referenced survey of issues concerning human genetic enhancement.
   
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2017)
  Human Genome Editing: Science, Ethics, and Governance.
  Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   
• Sandel MJ (2007).
  The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering (on reserve)
  Belknap Press, Cambridge MA
          A philosophical argument against human germline genome modification.
   
• Seedhouse E (2014).
  Beyond Human: Engineering Our Future Evolution
  Springer, New York
          A vision of possible transhuman futures seen through the lens of science fiction.