Writers have debated whether germline genome-editing is person-affecting or identity-affecting. The difference is thought to be ethically relevant to whether we should choose genome-editing or choose preimplantation genetic diagnosis and embryo selection, when seeking to prevent or produce bad conditions (e.g., cystic fibrosis, or deafness) in the individuals who will grow from the embryo edited or selected. We consider the very recent views of three prominent bioethicists and philosophers who have grappled with this issue. We claim that both sides are right, but that the sense in which genome-editing is person-affecting is less important, morally, when the aim is to have healthy children. Since this is the predominant objective of engaging in embryo selection and genome-editing, and since there are certain risks, at least for now, with genome-editing, it remains better, morally, to engage in embryo selection than genome-editing.